On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 01:58:06AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > ...which is exactly why I favor the term "pure blend" as a new name for > what is currently defined as CDD: you can "blend" (as in stir, shake, > sort) the priority of packages to favor postfix over Exim or XFCE over > Gnome, but pure can only mean 100% Debian.
it is almost certainly impossible to find perfect language, and pure blends sounds promising. i am not so sure that in the context of blending, essentially mixing things together, that pure will clearly define the scope of the blend. maybe word order is important here: "pure debian blend" seems clearer to me that "debian pure blend", and i'm not quite sure why. i also see a bit of an ambiguity: if you blend things purely from debian and put them onto a CD image outside of debian, is the blend still pure? if you put a blend of tea into a different box, i don't think it questions the purity of the blend itself. i think pure/officialness of CD images is worth noting. i also really like the slices of pie a nice analogy, as it clearly indicates something that is *part* of a larger whole, and i can't deny the enjoyment of pie. a slice of pie can be complimented by a little extra almond topping (CDD in development), or side of ice cream (derivatives), though the simplicity of a tasty slice of pie alone cannot be denied(CDD). "debian pure blend" almost makes me think of "debian pure-breeds", which seems sort of accurate language, though looses the food-related anologies that i like so much. live well, vagrant -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
