Re: Member distributions and popularity
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008, Matt Arnold wrote:
1. In some respects you're talking about Pure Blends/CDDs/Whatever
the heck we call them now ;)
I do not think that Ean is talking about Debian Pure Blends because the
most important feature of a Blend is that it is actually NO derivative.
(That's why we call them now not CDD any more because this very frequently
remained unclear for people who just recognised the name.) But what I would
like to see in connection to Ean's mail is that we try to propagate the
idea about the advantages a derivative could gain if it would merge back
into Debian and *become* a Blend (for instance there was a time when
DeMuDi (Debian Multimedia Distribution) intended to do this but this plan
was dropped as far as I know). The profit for both sides would be evident
in my opinion: Debian will become better multimedia support (to stick to
the DeMuDi example) and 64studio (offspring of the DeMuDi project) would
join a team of 1000+x developers to work on the same goal.
Regarding Ean's original mail: IMHO there is no need to call this an
"effort" or whatever. It might have been sufficient if Ean would have
actually prepared the needed wml code that generates the web page he
has in mind and fix the menu on www.debian.org to make it easily
accessible. There is not much need to talk about this - it would be
better to announce that it is just implemented.