On 22/05/06, Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There are serious costs involved with forking something. For gentoo this would include image problems by being seen as "evil" forkers.
Surely such decisions should be based on technical merit, and not political? The technical cost of forking is small.
Also mandriva, suse, ubuntu etc. distinguish themselves from the pack in which packages are offered in which configuration. Gentoo differs from that in that users can determine the configuration. The package manager directly influences the freedom available for the users. Making binary and source distros not easilly comparable.
I'm not sure I follow this line of reasoning - other distros can have external package managers because their users have less freedom? Are you concerned about the political effect of there being less to distinguish Gentoo from clones, or the fact that an external package manager might somehow seek to limit users freedom to determine configurations? -- [email protected] mailing list
