Hi again Mike, > How about this goal: deploy Debian Edu wheezy. ;-) Yeah, that would be great. That's why I asked about release timing!
If D-E wheezy would be in a useful state, I could start a deep debugging with direct use in production prior to official release. I like to live on the edges... ;-) > > >>Send the file back to this list and I will commit the translation. > >> > >>>What about release timings? I really need kernel >= 3 for my 10 > >>>starboard whiteboards (I'm using the russian GPL'ized lsadrv > >>>module). > >> > >>Is linux-image 3.2.x from squeeze-backports an option? We stuff up > >>our squeeze installation with packages from squeeze-backports which > >>works fine. > > > >I tested once the Kenji Muto .iso but only on pupil laptops. > >I dropped the experience in favour of Ubuntu 12.04 (brand new hardware > >combined with unskilled hands on). I should test it. > >Anyway, since years I'm used to do most of things on "testing" which normally > >is pretty stable. > > During a freeze phase in Debian, I fully agree. During non-freeze > stages (e.g. while multiarch was introduced lately) I must say, I > fully disagree... Well, I survived it, with clients workstations too (not server). If the overall architecture is kept from one version to the next, mixing a stable server with testing workstation would be a no-problem situation. > > >I don't understand why the debian-edu development is not kept > >up to date on testing, thus having a release timing synced with > >main debian release. > > This mostly due do lack of continuous man power. Those people who > are working on Debian Edu are doing great. However, all of us have > loads of fields of endeavour, so noone from the dev team can > contribute 100% time to Debian Edu. :-( I see the point :-( Having more people using and committing would help. > > >> > >>>My "non eduified" educational lan is already migrating to wheezy > >>>in these days. I also > >>>admit that debian-lan is also actracting me, because of flexibility. > >> > >>My secret dream is to use Debian LAN for D-E jessie. But for that, > >>we indeed have to push out D-E wheezy shortly after the official > >>Debian wheezy release. > >> > >>Mike > >> > > > >Merging the effort would be great. I also think this, and yes, for D-E jessie > >the devel, please, in sync with jessie itself. > > :-) So hop onboard, with each active developer, this becomes more likely. > Maybe, I right now considering this argument. > >In my wishlist I would also like to see Cfengine3 deeper boundled; > >im currently using it since > >November to keep the client in sync and is really great to > >automatize additional packages > >and configs. > > Yes, I have also had several deployed setups (not any more) that > were fully maintained by Cfengine3. However, if a switch over to > Debian LAN will be in the discussion, one should see what can be > handled by FAI and if then is anything left that has to be handled > by cfengine. But FAI itself is a mix of Cfengine2 with other tools. Cfengine3 should support Cf2 legacy scripts. Isn't it? Cheers -- Sysadmin SPSE-Tenero Ufficio: +41 91 735 62 48 Cellulare: +41 79 629 20 63 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
