On Sat, 2003-02-08 at 07:47, Michael Scherer wrote:
> Le Samedi 8 Février 2003 01:13, Gustavo Franco a écrit :
> > > But, I don't think we need to be a carbon copie of Debian.
> > > Debian is not the only volunteers OS project, everybody seems to forget
> > > FreeBSD, and other, or even some smalls os, such as AtheOs, OpenBeOS, and
> > > others, who don't work in the same way as Debian.
> >
> > In this case, you can try collect information about organization of the
> > projects cited above, and nothing only about Debian.
> Well, I did, but they are far from being well documented.
> All BSD have a core team, who make technical decision.
> This provides conservatism, and they are sure that the goals of the projects 
> are respected. ( this and some dinosaurs that should have disappeared, such 
> as csh.... :-)  )
> I don't know exactly how you can become one of the "technical chief", probably 
> based on merit.
> OpenBSD team release CDs each 6 month, as said before. They maintain the four 
> last release.  I have seen a card with the location of the developpers, but, 
> they are less than 20 ! They don't talk on how they add software to the ports 
> ( contributed software, such as KDE ), or who maintain it.
Read the documentation, here:

> NetBSD release frequently, something as each 6 months, more or less, and the 
> work is divided in 2 or more branchs ( 1.6,1.5,Current ), I think.
> FreeBSD works as NetBSD, but, they release less, and they maintain 2 or 3 
> branche ( 3.X,4.X,5.X ), + the cvs one, called current.
> I don't remember all details, so they may be wrong.
> You can check their website.
> As far as i know, OpenBEos is still in pre-alpha stage.
> And, Atheos was based on the work of only one person, who stopped it, and so, 
> some project begin to fork and then to work together. I don't have take a 
> look to this since 6 months, so this may be greatly inaccurate.
> And, to finish, did you know that Gentoo has adopted the Debian Social 
> Contract ?
> > > Some parts of Debian are great, some parts can be changed, and some parts
> > > don't really correspond to the Mandrake's touch. Just my view on this.
> >
> > Many parts can be changed and we're working on it.Why can't Mandrake
> > approach change with us too?
> Well, of course, why not.
> What are your proposition ?
Mandrake as a new project inside Debian.But it was refused here, many feels
involved.But if you change the original idea, try debian-project ML.The
Debian-Mandrake can receive financial support of SPI as described by
Goerzen, more and more developers, because Debian Developers
automatically can help this new project...But it's only a
proposition.Already refused, i known.

> [...]

> And, if it didn't exist, we still have the wonderful urpmi.
> I think this is the place to greatly thank François Pons for this wonderful 
> piece of software :-)
I was reading the source code.It's simple and functional in my view,
i've some suggestions.Definitely, *it works*. ;)

Gustavo Franco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to