[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Minutes of an Ubuntu-Debian discussion that happened at Debconf

Le mer 28 juin 2006 11:30, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :

> 4. Debian should provide patches of changes between two revisions of
> a package to make it easier for derivatives to track Debian. This is
> just like point 2, but reversed.

> 7. Many DDs know about Scott's patch repository but they have no idea
> of what stuff they will find in there.

that's a false statement, a lot of DD know what they will find in there: 
a lot of huge unusable patches (due to relibtoolization or such) that 
are useless.

Or a lot of diffs that are not relevant for debian, because ubuntu does 
not care a lot about binary compatibility and that their xorg 
transition a lot ahead from debian just put a lot of cruft in the diffs 
that are useless, and hide completely the other things that are useful 
to debian.

I've tried to use those diffs a couple of time. I just don't bother to 
look at them since.

> 8. Improve Scott's page. The look (and usefulness) of that page
I don't care about the look. or the presentation, it's irrelevant for 
work efficiency.

the problem here, is that neither Debian (because it's the ancestor 
here, and it's really fair) wants to work in ubuntu structures, nor 
Ubuntu (because they have agendas or whatever reason) in debian ones.

Meaning that the work is done twice:
 * Xorg transition ;
 * python 2.4 transition ;
 * ...

resulting into completely *NOT* binary-compatible distribution (when 
something as basic as xorg/python/.. deviates, you can't pretend to be 
compatible). What I'd prefer is that big transition would be as much as 
possible prepared collectively. Else, we are bound to have useless 
crufty diffs, that I even won't bother to read, because it's only lost 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder@debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org

Attachment: pgpRpPWeT1feZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: