On Aug 21, Paul Wade wrote > > Long live anarchy! Long live the Revolution and the Counter-Revolution! > Long live the Dedicated Diehard Debianist! > > I will be running a special on 1.3.whatever_it_really_is binary CD's > starting this weekend and continuing for at least one month. Longer if > that's what it takes to clean this up. I will make it cheaper to get a > 1.3.really_current binary CD than the 1.3.1 Official set. Details will be > up at http://www.greenbush.com/ by noon tomorrow. > > On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Paul Serice wrote: > > > Now for your anarchist side, when governments become overbearing they > > tend to nationalize -- meaning they take property away from > > corporations (and other private organizations or individuals) for the > > supposed general welfare. So, it is not difficult to see that > > freedom from intrusive government does not necessarily imply fewer > > corporations. As a matter of fact, strong and health corporations > > arguably contribute as much to your personal autonomy as any other > ^^^^^^^^ > > single factor. > > Does Microsoft contribute to my personal autonomy? If so, I prefer > anarchy. Linux is revolutionary in nature. What if Linus had decided > instead to develop something that required Windows or SCO Unix? I notice > that the people behind Debian like to avoid dependencies on commercial > products. It is a reality that many users could not create their first > rescue floppy without MS-DOS, but we have to live with it because we don't > want to be such 'purists' that we have to ship floppies to get people > started. > > Imitating the large software company is anethema to the philosophies of > dedicated Linux enthusiasts. The honest thing to do is let the consumer > know exactly what he is getting. The 1.3.1 Official CD files are > timestamped July 7. Since then, the stable ftp archive has had at least 2 > changes which warrant a DEFINITE DISTINCTION from those CD sets. Those 2 > changes were the replacement of disks/current. Since these are the images > that install the base, the change is not trivial. Otherwise they would be > in a testing or incoming directory. They were installed into stable to fix > bugs or add features, I assume. > > Therefore, the ftp archive should CLEARLY differentiate itself from the > 1.3.1 that was pressed onto so many discs that the foolish vendors now > need to unload. So call it 1.3.3 or 1.3.1R3 or whatever, but make it > obvious. If you don't do that you will need a corporation to protect the > developers from personal liability. Why? Because Debian is going to great > lengths to protect a few vendors who made a bad decision and need to get > rid of the 'dead horse' inventory. When that is done it will it be okay to > move things from bo-updates to bo and change the symlink to 1.3.2? > > Maybe the people who bought those CD sets will start thinking they've been > fooled a bit and will hate Debian more than Microsoft. > > Dave used some strong language because he is rightfully pissed off. > > Now let me say this as a vendor of freshly recorded (1.3.?) Debian CD-R > products: > > F___ the CD vendors. All of them including myself. If I wanted to just > duplicate a CD image, I would copy a Slackware or Redhat CD and actually > make a profit. Those of us who actually organize CD images would be better > off if Debian would go back to the good old numbering scheme and > concentrate on the concept of painless upgrading. That way people who > found an old 1.1.x CD could pop in one of our 1.3.999 discs and upgrade > their system without a lot of hassles. > > I say increment the release numbers. I doubt that the vendors who are > still stuck with 1.3.1 inventory will decide to press the next release > whenever it comes out. > > If there is a need (and a market) for cheap Debian CD's let me be honest > enough to tell everyone the costs: > > 1000 CD-ROM's $750 > Paper sleeves 5 cents > Sturdy mailer 20 cents > > So it costs about $1.80 for a binary/source set with 2 colors printed on > the discs. It costs another 78 cents to mail them to US customers. Grand > total of $2.58. These vendors are charging $8.99 with shipping and > handling and they need protection? I suppose the rationale is that they > are paying good wages to the people who put the discs in the sleeves and > seal the mailer. > > I preferred it before when it went from 1.2 to 1.2.18 in about 7 months. I > mean the upgrades were free, right? Look at it this way: if you had to pay > $50.00 per upgrade to a commercial OS that would be a $900.00 value! > > When I was asked if the 'Official CD' would hurt my business, I said it > wouldn't because of the revision frequency of Debian. I didn't expect this > new fuzzy numbering system to go along with it! Well, it has hurt my > business. But don't expect me to give up and go away. > > Oh, I almost forgot. F___ Microsoft, too! > > Paul Wade > Greenbush Technologies Corporation >
I will state up front that I am not at this time a developer. Thus, I realize I have no vote in the matter. It has been brought up on the users list, therefore I will speak up on the matter. I have felt, and do consider myself in alignment with David Cinege and Paul Wade. I do not think that _any_ decision should be made on business, marketing, or political reasons, Whatever the cost, ONLY quality of the code and distribution should be considered. I believe that only harm can come from asking any government's sanction of the project, and money can only corrupt it. I apologize if my opinion is not shared by the majority, but it is mine, and all are free to disagree. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mike Schmitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.bend-or.com/~mschmitz Don't blame me - I voted libertarian! http://www.lp.org/ Use Debian Linux - the free Gnu/Linux http://www.debian.org/ -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
