Please remove live-package from Etch
Holger Levsen wrote:
> That's easy for you and me, but for some people installing backports is a
> problem, be it a technological problem or an organisational problem (only
> allowed to use stable).
live-package as well as live-helper do require root privileges to build
images, Therefore, I don't think that your argument is an issue in the
"real" world:
* I assume that everyone who has the right to use root privileges does
also have the right to install a backport.
* The backports are in place since a few hours, we only need to
properly document it, so that even newbie users can follow it.
>> * building live systems with the newest build tool is better,
>> even if the release it is build off is Etch/stable.
>
> Why is it better? Is the result any different?
cleaner build, support of usb stick images, encryption support (this is
actually casper doing it, but anyway), totally modular, easy
customizable/extensible.. well, just about everything got better. did
you have a look at live helper already?
> live-package produced wonderful
> live-cds, maybe live-helper produces better ones, but the ones from
> live-package also work fine.
not really.
live-package would have needed at least another 5 patches to fix its
behavior from etch=testing to etch=stable. Remember, the etch
live-package is pretty old (early November 2006) and not compareable to
the last versions from March.
And there would have been at least another 5 patches required just to
fix the bugs which were fixed within live-helper (e.g. proxy thing or
aptitude typo comes to mind).
They would have been needed to be accepted by -release, which would be
additional work. This would have been a must, because I do not feel good
delivering half-baken/buggy software, and I my impression is that
-release would not have been lucky about handling my wishes.
(now, it's too late anyway)
>> * live-package is not present in Sarge
>> we ask you to remove live-package from Etch.
>
> IMHO you just killed progress Debian made since Sarge.
>
> Any chance to revert this decission? I'm willing to help with the
> consequences... I'd start by adding a nice fat pointer in the README.Debian.
such as "we do not support this package. use it or do not use it - we
don't care, do not ask us anything about it"? :)
I think that having the old live-package in etch would have made more
"damage" to our live project than having it not in at all.
--
Address: Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist
Email: daniel.baumann@panthera-systems.net
Internet: http://people.panthera-systems.net/~daniel-baumann/
Reply to: