where is this ticket that you reference? gnu.org #1262331 - it is not on the CC list - is that a on public tracker?
On 01/17/2018 11:45 AM, Therese Godefroy via RT wrote: > Should a distro that hasn't been maintained for several years be listed in free-distros.html, especially if it is based on a major distro which itself isn't maintained anymore? I am thinking of Blag, based on Fedora 10 (2010). i asked this question myself when i did a review of the FSDG distros list last summer[1] noting that proteanos appears to be inactive as well - still today there has been no response on either of the blag or proteanos mailing lists[2][3] - six months with no response to a simple question like "is this project still active?" should indicate a negative answer my opinion however, is that there is no reason to remove a distro from the list only for being unmaintained - if it works: it works - and always will - but the case with blag is something different - blag actually has no software available - the download links on their website have not worked in a very long time because (as ive heard) the files were lost - "blag" exists in reality only in the form of it's website - so there literally is no blag distribution by nature of the fact that there is nothing being distributed - so i still suggest that blag be removed (or perhaps moved to a new "honerable mentions" section) - but if proteanos is still available and viable software then there is no reason to remove it merely because it is un-supported On 01/17/2018 11:45 AM, Therese Godefroy via RT wrote: > Conversely, if unmaintained distros are listed, is there any good reason not to list a new one, which clearly is actively maintained (Uruk)? there is an evaluation process for adding new distros - uruk has requested consideration about a year ago and it fell short of FSDG standards at that time; but they are improving it and the discussion is still open[4] On 01/17/2018 11:45 AM, Therese Godefroy via RT wrote: > Le Dim 31 Déc 2017 15:50:11, [email protected] a écrit : >> BLAG is inactive >> Dragora GNU Linux-Libre is inactive >> Dynebolic is inactive >> Musix is inactive it was this comment that prompted me to respond - as mentioned above, i looked into the current status of all of the FSDG distro last summer and i can not concour with Le Dim's evaluation dragora has been very active in recent months working on the next release - far from being inactive, if all FSDG distros were ranked today according to development activity, i would place dragora in second place closely behind parabola with trisquel a more distant third - of course, to put into persoective, parabola, being a rolling release distro requires a far greater amount of routine maintenance just to remain sane where the other FSDG distros are LTS and designed to require only high-priority stability/security upgrades - that is only to say that some distros require more or less maintenance than others the developer of dynebolic is still as active as ever in the dyne project and is planning for the next release of dynebolic to be based on devuan once the devuan-sdk is completed the musix developer is also still in contact with it's community and is planning the next release[5] the important thing to note is that regardless of whatever development activity is immediately apparent, the current releases of dragora, dynebolic, and musix are still available and viable, functioning perfectly as intended; and their developers are still in communication with the community - this is an especially important factor to consider in regards to "Live" distros such as dynebolic and musix which are static by design (i.e. they are intended to be run directly from the read-only medium and never installed nor upgraded) - the fact that the operating system is guaranteed never to change a bit from one boot to the next is among the most desirable features of these distros - they are not the typical sort of distro that require any intermediate maintenance nor is that even possible; so such a distro can not reasonably be said to be "inactive"; because they are designed to be fixed in form ("carved in stone" if you will) - the project itself could be be deemed dormant or inactive; as in: "we can probably not expect version N+1"; but that says nothing of the efficacy of any current available versions [1]: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2017-08/msg00000.html [2]: https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/blag-whereto/2017-July/thread.html [3]: http://lists.proteanos.com/proteanos-dev/2017/08/ [4]: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2017-12/msg00003.html [5]: https://musixdistro.wordpress.com/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
