Your name isn't showing up for some reason. You make some good arguments.
Comments below.
On 4/21/2017 6:05 PM, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
My only concern with this argument is that it seems like it takes longer to
get fixes pushed up stream then it does to spin up a custom distribution. It
also seems to me that a lot of what's needed in a custom distribution is
packaging and customization as opposed to programming.
From my experience, mostly what's needed is custom scripts and config
files. A lot of this could be done with custom packages. A thought I had was
asking for community submissions of scripts which make programs more
accessible. They could be put into either a tar archive or .deb package
which anyone could install on any system as config files aren't arch or
platform specific. I decided it would be too hard for one person to keep up
with and make sure new versions didn't break the old config files.
Initially, yes, it would take longer to get fixes pushed upstream. That's
why I suggest working with the upstream software developers and not the
distro developers. That way, a fix to ALSA or Firefox is picked up by all
major distros instead of one at a time. However, in some cases, that isn't
possible. I'm referring to installers. If a few unknown people submit
patches, the review process takes a long time and the patches might not be
accepted. If a nonprofit organization is formed specifically for that
purpose and not only submits patches but posts them either on github or
similar, not only do they get more review but they are more likely to be
taken seriously since there is an actual organization behind them. I know
there are exceptions, but I think most people take Apache, Mozilla and Gnome
much more seriously than a single, random developer. When they know your
reputation and you have submitted enough patches, you can commit directly
upstream, but as you say, that takes a long time. Case in point, it can take
years to be an official Debian developer who can maintain packages without
review.
I look at Vinux and Ubuntu as an example. It seems like Luke and the Vinux
developers were able to get a lot more accomplished in a lot less time
working with Vinux then they were able to do by trying to push things
upstream in Ubuntu. Focusing on getting changes upstream, when there could
have been a Vinux available, would have meant fewer blind Linux users and
some of those blind Linux users would have spent more of their own time
setting up and customizing Ubuntu and finding and installing accessible
applications. If you think vinux users are going to just quit and give up
when they run into a Linux issue, I'd think that problem would be even more
prevalent if they didn't have a Vinux where a lot of the work was already
done for them.
Yes and no. First, don't forget that Vinux was itself based on Ubuntu. It
wasn't built from scratch. Ubuntu had serious accessibility problems in the
past. I wouldn't say it's perfect now, but it's a lot better. Arch might be
more current for the desktop, but it's a lot harder to install. For a
mainstream, graphical distro, Ubuntu MATE is very good. When I tried Vinux,
it had a broken installer and the system crashed. I got a few comments that
people gave up for those reasons. I understand the major bugs are fixed now,
but it still doesn't use what I would consider a friendly, customizable
installer. While I'm opposed to blind-centric distros, I realize they have
their place and some people want them. I think what you say below makes very
good sense. Create a custom distro based on Fedora or whatever. When it's
stable, work with upstream to get those customizations included. What I
would like to see is a custom flavor of Ubuntu MATE. It would boot up
talking and have the features of Vinux but would be supported by the Ubuntu
developers and use the Ubuntu installer. Remember that just as 95% of Ubuntu
is based on Debian, at least 95% of Vinux is based on Ubuntu. Really, in
terms of code and custom packages, we're talking about a small number of
bytes compared to the overall distro. To me, it makes little sense to waste
a lot of time recycling 95% or more of what another distro has already done
just for a few little fixes.
IMHO, I think a hybrid approach is the way to go. Build a custom
distribution, prove that it can work, build up your blind user base and work
to get those changes upstream. I know it seems like this is spreading an
already thin resource even thinner, but I think it's the most likely road to
success.
I hadn't thought of this in that way, but I think you have something. The
big problem with any niche distro, blind or not, is the small user base and
lack of support. If you can get even, say, a dozen developers and dedicated
support people and build up a solid user base, that speaks louder to
mainstream distros than a few blind guys playing around with a distro one or
two others put together. I remember in the early days of Speakup that this
was the case. No one took it seriously. There was no official kernel
support. When 2.4 came out, the patches for 2.2 kernels broke. When 2.6 came
out, the cycle repeated. I used custom boot floppies to install Debian
Potato because I wouldn't have Speakup otherwise. Eventually, Gentoo, Debian
and Slackware included it. Finally, it made its way into staging and,
unfortunately, still doesn't have official kernel support. If a nonprofit
could raise money even for one paid developer, that would help immensely.
Even FreeBSD includes Orca because it's part of Gnome and officially supported.
I also think that custom distributions is just part of the Linux ecosystem.
How many custom distributions are there out there to satisfy every niche? I
don't think this should be any different for the blind Linux user.
There are about 300 as I recall. I doubt if you've heard of 250 of them.
Again, in principle, I agree. If I want to make a talking rescue CD or
someone else wants their pet distro, sure, go for it! If I implied that I'm
opposed to the freedom to do what you want, I apologize. I'm opposed to
blind-centric distros mostly due to the lack of resources and community
support. I wrote to a Sonar developer about having very low volume. He said
he didn't know how to fix it and that's as far as it went. However, for
those who want Linux From Scratch or whatever pet distro they like, have
fun! Just remember you're mostly on your own. I find it interesting that
more devices for the blind are built on Linux or Android.
_______________________________________________
Blinux-list mailing list
Blinux-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
