Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On Wednesday 27 January 1999, at 14 h 40, the keyboard of Paul Seelig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry, i currently don't have any access to the sources of the boot floppies and therefore don't know about the TODO list's contents. You can get the last version by CVS: :ext:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/debian/home/sr1/lib/cvs/boot-floppies i downloaded the boot and base floppies and did a base install with them. Strange enough the yes/no answering at the configuration stage right after the first booting from the freshly installed base system didn't work. This bug has been reported #32324 and fixed since. What i miss after the base install is: - a default entry with the correct block device as used for the installation for accessing the CD drive in /etc/fstab like: /dev/hdc /cdrom iso9660 ro,noauto,user 0 0 A small possible problem: it conflicts with the default access method for dselect, multi_cd, which does not expect the CD to be already mounted (even with noauto, this is a risk). So, it would require a reorganization. But the /dev/cdrom link is there and is more important, IMHO. It allows multi_cd to go on smoothly. The preselection profiles/Admin contains *three* Emacs variants (emacs19/20 and xemacs20). The same case in profiles/Devel_comp, profiles/Devel_std, profiles/Dialup, profiles/Work_sci, profiles/Work_std and profiles/Standard contains both emacs19/20. That's somewhat pretty insane IMHO because usually one single emacs (preferably the smallest and fastest) should definitely suffice Well, I'll suggest that for potato. It will start a nice flame-war on debian-devel emacs vs. xemacs. leaving all other variants as an option for later installation to the installer's discretion. Likewise for the vi variations. Which emacs or vi to use is a matter of personal choice of the installer. This contradicts the whole idea of profiles. A profile is a predefined set of choices that *we* think OK and the installer which chooses a profile trusts us blindly. I regard the Average User as unable to choose between emacs and xemacs at the beginning (or between exim and sendmail or between apache and roxen). So, we choose for him. I think it is a very bad habit to first fill up the disk with redundant selections and then expect the installer to deinstalll what [s]he doesn't like/want in order to make room for other software. This is a typical example of the main problem with the Let's make everything easier for Joe User approach: nobody agrees on what is easier. For me, I think that most users expect things to be already there (I've read in an Unix manual about tcpdump and Debian hasn't it. This distribution is broken.) without a new installation, which will certainly be painful for the typical user. machine, but possibly far less capable hardware. The wealth of software coming with Debian doesn't mean that everything and the kitchen sink should be installed. Most of the messages I received, as the maintainer of the list of pre-defined profiles are XXX is missing, why don't you add it?. What i'd like to see is something like profiles/Textprocessing for the writing people containing the TeX system and text/PostScript related utilities. In any case i'll try to make up such a selection and send it to you ASAP. Be my guest.
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On Thu, Jan 28, 1999 at 10:08:40AM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: On Wednesday 27 January 1999, at 14 h 40, the keyboard of Paul Seelig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What i'd like to see is something like profiles/Textprocessing for the writing people containing the TeX system and text/PostScript related utilities. In any case i'll try to make up such a selection and send it to you ASAP. Be my guest. Hmmm I remember I made a pretty complete TeX profile when I created the profiles for hamm. Isn't it there anymore ? Greetings, Christian PS.: Thanks for taking over the profiles and tasks, Stephane, you did a splendid job so far. And no, I didn't use any sophisticated scripts for generating the set of profiles for hamm, your perl scripts are a big improvement. Now back to getting Debian/Sparc done ;-) -- Christian Meder, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] What's the railroad to me ? I never go to see Where it ends. It fills a few hollows, And makes banks for the swallows, It sets the sand a-blowing, And the blackberries a-growing. (Henry David Thoreau)
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On Thursday 28 January 1999, at 11 h 23, the keyboard of Christian Meder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I remember I made a pretty complete TeX profile when I created the profiles for hamm. Isn't it there anymore ? There is a TeX *task* (not a profile) of 201 Mb (it includes all the dependencies, so it goes down to lprng, cpio, perl...). Very complete I hope, giving the size :-)
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
Enrique Zanardi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 01:32:28PM -0700, John Lapeyre wrote: I guess I should add this to my last post about how bad the installation is. The boot floppies themselves and apt are quite good. Getting the base system on is easy for someone who knows what is going on. Probably not for a beginner. Suggestions for making the boot-floppies beginner-friendly are welcome (but read the todo list first). Of course, code is even more welcome. :-) The boot floppies are excellent for what they intend to do. They try to provide maximum flexibility, and then to be as friendly as possible. Perhaps a clueless-proof install should be on a separate disk. I won't say anymore, because I have not installed RH ors SuSE recently, and have no concrete suggestions. Also, in retrospect, I should have realized that picking the scientific workstation option could cause problems . That was over 500 packages . This is a severe test for any OS. -- John Lapeyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tucson,AZ http://www.physics.arizona.edu/~lapeyre
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On Tue, Jan 26, 1999 at 09:33:16AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: hamm was released with a pre-selections wrapper, where you could chose certain sets of pre-selected packages. it works, but could use some improvement and probably needs to be updated for slink - there's a good place for you to expend your energy if you care about this. I has been updated for slink months ago (thanks to Stephane Bortzmeyer). Now we are just polishing the lists for the non-i386 architectures. Thanks, -- Enrique Zanardi[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 08:00:06PM +0100, Paul Seelig wrote: On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Steve Shorter wrote: Since when has the purpose of debian been to appease the interests of the mass of unskilled consumers? There are lots of dists that are trying to do that. I'm sure they will do a good job of introducing newbies to Linux. But I never thought that was the purpose of Debian. Please don't let's start *this* kind of discussion yet again. It's *not* about appeasing to the masses of unskilled consumers. It's about increasing ease of installation, use and maintenance. installing debian could be made a little easier and faster - mostly by having non-interactive installs. how, exactly, do you think that it could be made easier to use and maintain? i hope you haven't fallen for the myth that a GUI config is inherently easier than a text file config, because that is simply not true. GUI configuration tools are simpler for simple tasks but range from harder to impossible when it comes to more complex tasks. (note i said simpler and not easier. they're not the same thing - simpler does not always mean easier) this is inherent in the nature of simplified GUI configuration tools - they achieve their simplicity by constraining the range of choices. if the GUI programmer hasn't thought of and written a dialog for a particular configuration then it can't be done. even worse: all of the linux/unix gui config tools that i have looked at will lose valuable information from hand-crafted configuration files. Skilled people definitely benefit from such time saving aspects in their daily jobs. Even professionals don't want to always have to deal with things which explicitly require a professional. Excellence in design doesn't necessarily have to result in awkwardness. 'awkwardness' is subjective. for configuring a program, i find anything other than editing a well-commented text file with vi to be extremely awkward and difficult, especially when the machine i am configuring is at the other end of a flooded modem or isdn link. i don't want to have to take my hands off the keyboard and click on half-a-dozen OK buttons or icons or dialog boxes just to change one little thing in a config file. i want to be able to comment out certain parts of the configuration while trialling new options or to leave them in there as documentation/historical record. The fact that even the mass of unskilled consumers benefit from this is a completely different issue. make a system easy enough for an idiot to use and only an idiot will want to use it there are other dists which cater quite well to the mass of unskilled consumers. debian caters well for the skilled and for those who are willing to learn. debian should make it easier to learn, and therefore easier to make the transition from unskilled newbie to skilled systems administrator - but it should do this with good documentation and wrapper scripts where necessary (e.g. stuff like sendmailconfig and to a lesser extent, the fmirror config wrapper that i wrote) The point is that what's good for unskilled people can be equally good for skilled people who no by themselves how to provoke trouble if they really want it. ;-) i find that very very hard to believe. what is good for unskilled people is to constrain their options so that they don't get overwhelmed by new information and the multitude of choices available. that is NOT good for skilled people...in fact, it is extremely annoying and frustrating. Debian IMHO should be aimed toward the skilled technical user and those who are already Linux skilled. There is no other dist that is trying to fill this role. [ ... ] Where's the problem (other than that *you* don't care) to make Debian comfortable even for the skilled technical user? Hey, i'm skilled enough to handle all this stuff but it would be *really* nice if i wouldn't need to have to be skilled to be able to to certain standard tasks which should rather be automated. then write scripts to automate them. if your scripts are good enough and of general use then submit them to the maintainer of the relevant packages(s). problem solved. i haven't yet had a debian developer reject any of the wrapper scripts that i have written to automate or simplify administration tasks. all have been more than happy that someone else is willing to do some work to make their package even better. the trick is to write your contrib stuff so that it works for you, and then re-write it so that it is generally useful for a lot of people...then submit it to the package maintainer. that may seem like a lot of extra work, just to use a package...but in many cases, it's a lot LESS work than re-implementing your custom stuff every time a package is upgraded. that's a strong incentive to share your improvements. Yes, i've learned my share and now what? Do i still have to use a system which lets me explicitly feel that i *had* to learn my share to take
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 07:14:35PM +, thomas lakofski wrote: As an experienced Debian user, I'll second these sentiments. Since buzz I've been waiting for the Debian installation process to become a (as it should be) 30 minute process, hopefully with some tools included for mass installations. I use Debian myself exclusively but have to hesitate before recommending it to others new to Linux because the process of getting started is harder than it should be. improvements can certainly be made in the rescue-disk install scripts. i think everyone agrees that they're not perfect. however, the biggest problem is not a matter of easy vs hard. it is a matter of scale. it takes a long time to run dselect when there are over 2000 packages in debian. for mass production of machines, there are tools which can make that faster (see my reply to paul for a summary of the process i use). I also am disappointed with the attitude of some people towards making these things easier to do. Is it some kind of techno-snobbery, maybe? i think it's more practicality than snobbery. there aren't any 'easy' configuration tools which don't achieve their simplicity at the price of flexibility. Making things easier does not necessitate dumbing-down things for more competent users. if you, or anyone else, can implement an easier way without dumbing things down then it will be received very happily. unfortunately, nobody has yet come up with such a thing. Once up and running, a Debian system is far more maintainable than the alternatives -- a great factor in on-going ease of use. agreed. and one of the reasons that debian is more maintainable is because we haven't taken the easy way out and replaced text-file configuration with semi-adequate gui/menu-based configuration. Can some focus be brought to getting there with similar ease? I've been with Debian for over 2 years now and would be sad to have to abandon it in the long run because of 'we don't do that' politicking instead of pragmatism amongst developers. there's two sides to that coin. debian's way is to do it Right. To do something right is hard, a lot harder than doing it wrong. i would like it if debian had a right solution to easier configuration (and for some packages we do...look at sendmailconfig for example)...but i would much rather nothing than doing it wrong. implementing a bad solution now would make it much more difficult (nearly impossible) to migrate to a good solution in the future. craig -- craig sanders
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On Sun, 24 Jan 1999, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 08:51:25PM +, thomas lakofski wrote: OK, since it seems that this kind of thing will probably only happen in a commercial context, maybe it would make sense to arrange commercial sponsorship of Debian in a bigger way. I think the first part of your sentence is a bit unfair. To make installation easier requires hard work. If it would be easy, it would have I understand the difficulty of the task -- I think it's also fair to say that because it's not the most glamourous of tasks it might be easier to attract developers to do it with some funding. been long done. The trick is to keep flexibility (and don't tell me SuSE is flexibel). Doing it easy for the newbie and configurable for the experienced user requires a well though out configuration and administration system. At least for multi-installation this is currently developed on the debian-admintool list. It's certainly possible to have ease and flexibility -- the install can ask you as its' first question whether you want a 'typical install' or 'custom setup'. Since there is no typical install really, some simplified choice of roles could be presented -- say Desktop, Intranet Server or Internet Server. Custom setup could then be left as flexible as necessary. Hardware autodetection would be another good thing, but only if implemented well and reliable. This does only work with open hardware specifications. It's not the lack of interest, but the lack of real, skilled contributions in this area, which addresses all concerns. Certainly -- again, maybe it would be easier to attract skilled developers with some sponsorship. Needless to say that any contribution is welcome, be it from volunteers or commercial organizations. But let's not drag Debian too deep into agreements with commercial contributors. If you can convince a company to write a good installation procedure, I am sure nobody will neglect it, provided it is technically convincing. Debian does make decisions on technical grounds, and I would not like to see this changed. I was thinking that the contributions would be financial (rather than code) to existing developers (or similarly-minded new ones) so that they could concentrate more on Debian development and still be able to earn a living. rgds, -tl .. please forgive my abrupt ending hre - but my conection is xtrememleyyhiclmelyey BAD hiccuppy etc must sign off - EF D8 33 68 B3 E3 E9 D2 C1 3E 51 22 8A AA 7B 98
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
I did a fresh install yesterday from a hamm CD (our free CheapBytes CD). I chose the scientifc workstation option. This caused a minor nightmare. The only reason I was able to complete the install is because I have a few hundred hours experience in maintaining debian systems. I really like Debian, but it's installation is just terrible. (One problem is that fweb can get into a state in which it can be neither installed nor removed) I can't complain though, because I am not going to take the time to fix it in the near future. A commercial venture would be a good idea, because a full time employee could do quite a bit for the installation process in a few months, and contribute back to the project. -- John Lapeyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tucson,AZ http://www.physics.arizona.edu/~lapeyre
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
I guess I should add this to my last post about how bad the installation is. The boot floppies themselves and apt are quite good. Getting the base system on is easy for someone who knows what is going on. Probably not for a beginner. John Lapeyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tucson,AZ http://www.physics.arizona.edu/~lapeyre
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 01:32:28PM -0700, John Lapeyre wrote: I guess I should add this to my last post about how bad the installation is. The boot floppies themselves and apt are quite good. Getting the base system on is easy for someone who knows what is going on. Probably not for a beginner. Suggestions for making the boot-floppies beginner-friendly are welcome (but read the todo list first). Of course, code is even more welcome. :-) Thanks, -- Enrique Zanardi[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On 24 Jan 1999, John Lapeyre wrote: I guess I should add this to my last post about how bad the installation is. The boot floppies themselves and apt are quite good. Getting the base system on is easy for someone who knows what is going on. Probably not for a beginner. As someone who has done countless debian installs on lots of weird hardware I can safely say that Debian's install is straightforward but requires technical skill. You can install Debian on virtually any system but the installer may not hold your hand. The packaging system allows so much choice that it too does need some degree of technical knowledge, but if you know what you are doing it is very straightforward and gives pretty much exactly what you want. Personally I have a list of packages I like to see on a system and I use apt-get install `cat list` and watch the magic. Everything else I just install as-needed. The only thing I wish for is dhcp and ftp/http support in the boot floppies, it is not always easy to find a nfs server for the images. Jason
Re: Debian goes big business?
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 10:38:54AM +0100, J.H.M. Dassen wrote: On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 20:26:12 +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: i mostly agree but wouldn't put it anywhere near that strongly. I would. Ben's phrasing strongly reminds me of Robert A. Heinlein; especially of the concept of TANSTAAFL and the political system he describes in Starship Troopers, where the right to vote must be earned through a tour of duty of public (not necessary military) service. In the case of Debian, users do not have the right of vote, but can earn it by becoming developers (i.e. by maintaining packages, but also by writing documentation, maintaining the website etc.). such a system works fine for an organisation (like debian) where participation or membership is completely voluntary. it would suck for the real world where participation in the nation state is involuntary, and there's nowhere outside to go to. Heinlein wrote some good books, but you've got to be careful in your reading if you want to avoid adopting some of his more fascist pro-militaristic and ultra-capitalist politics. Also, the sexual politics was certainly quite progressive for the '50s and '60s but comes across is being old-fashioned sexist trash these days. his stuff is still an enjoyable read, though (if you ignore complete crap like the number of the beast). Pournelle's even worse. in partnership with Niven he writes some great stories. take the politics with a large grain of salt, though. Must admit I like the Think of it as evolution in action phrase, though i use it in contexts quite contrary to their usage :-) (BTW: TANSTAAFL was Larry Niven, not Heinlein IIRC) i better stop now before debian-devel detours into an sf crit list for a while. craig -- craig sanders
Re: Debian goes big business?
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 12:48:47PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: (BTW: TANSTAAFL was Larry Niven, not Heinlein IIRC) Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, I thought. Actually I never read it but it was a favourite of some people in the local FidoNet region a few years back (as Craig might remember?) Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3TYD [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Debian packages at ftp://ftp.rising.com.au/pub/hamish. PGP#EFA6B9D5 CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome. http://hamish.home.ml.org
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 04:10:52PM +0100, Paul Seelig wrote: The first thing a future Debian entrepreneur interested in financial success would have to address would be to fix all those things which we Debian propeller heads have preferred to mostly neglect up until now: ease of install and ease of useability for both sysadmins and users. These things have to become *at least* as dead easy as it *already is* with SuSE. It would be a very healthy experience for everybody to go out once in a while and purchase a SuSE copy and do a fresh install with it. Some would be astonished and some might even be frightened to see what Debian definitely lacks. These are some excellent points, and I hope people read this and think about it. When you are getting money for something, you have a responsiblity to someone else, usually your company, but also, in the larger picture, whoever ends up paying for what you do. While there are some drawbacks, there are also many positive aspects to this - it forces you, for better or worse, to work with some kind of schedule, and towards some specific goals, instead of just it works for me. Debian right now has all its it works for me ducks in a row - it is great and wonderful for those of us who can appreciate it, but, without some people really working to make it easier (and having the financial backing to maybe do it full time), it probably isn't going to have broad appeal real soon. Once again, to most of us, this is probably not a grave problem - Debian won't have trouble continuing in its present form, it's not like we'll go away because of lack of funds, but, on the other hand, we will continue to occupy an increasingly smaller portion of the market. Maybe now would be a good time to create a debian-business? I'm not sure -consultants is really broad enough. This is something I'm quite interested in. I firmly believe in the ideals of free software, and, infact, like free software so much that I'd like to spend all day working on it/for it. However, I'm not sure that that aspect of things has been sorted out yet... it should be an interesting couple of years:- Ciao, -- David Welton http://www.efn.org/~davidw Debian GNU/Linux - www.debian.org
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On 23 Jan 1999, Paul Seelig wrote: and annoyances they'd have with Debian. They won't care about Debian's rather unaccessable technical superiority if the installation hinders them from getting the beast at least easily up and running and will recommend SuSE to the rest of the world. That's how SuSE became the biggest player on the Linux market in Germany. And because SuSE Since when has the purpose of debian been to appease the interests of the mass of unskilled consumers? There are lots of dists that are trying to do that. I'm sure they will do a good job of introducing newbies to Linux. But I never thought that was the purpose of Debian. is even easier to install and maintain than Redhat it will eventually become a major player in the US as well. Debian in comparison is still a far cry from what it's really all about becoming popular for the world. Debian IMHO should be aimed toward the skilled technical user and those who are already Linux skilled. There is no other dist that is trying to fill this role. And it is not possible to please the mass market of unskilled consumers and the skilled technical person at the same time. Their requirments are quite different. I wouldn't recommend Debian to my non Linux savy friends either because i want them to *like* Linux and currently it is really hard for a newbie to find something likeable about Debian. I myself like I started with Slackware. That is the dist that I recommend and install for newbies. The reason I use debian now is because of its technical excellence and such a distribution saves me the time of having to put together my own distribution. If it wasn't for debian I would have to spend a lot of time compiling and editing source to get a technically competent system that gives me the freedom that I require. The first thing a future Debian entrepreneur interested in financial success would have to address would be to fix all those things which we Debian propeller heads have preferred to mostly neglect up until now: ease of install and ease of useability for both sysadmins and users. These things have to become *at least* as dead easy as it *already is* with SuSE. The key to debians future is not market sales of its dist. Debian like UNIX will succeed because it is possible to learn how everything works, and it is designed to accomplish a technical not a commercial goal. It is an excellent example of the fusion of pedagogy and production, of fashion and function. The future lies not in selling to a mass market of unskilled consumers but rather in the technical training and recruitment of a cadre of technical leaders and knowledgable advocates. To be sure, there is much work to be done in the area of technical training. Already there are discissions starting around Linux certification. But this effort may not lead to a program to develop technical competence. In fact it may lead completely away from it. The training/user/developer/distribution/Internet_service collage posses some fascinating possibilites. How debian or its progeny figure in that future will be quite interesting. -steve
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Steve Shorter wrote: Since when has the purpose of debian been to appease the interests of the mass of unskilled consumers? There are lots of dists that are trying to do that. I'm sure they will do a good job of introducing newbies to Linux. But I never thought that was the purpose of Debian. Please don't let's start *this* kind of discussion yet again. It's *not* about appeasing to the masses of unskilled consumers. It's about increasing ease of installation, use and maintenance. Skilled people definitely benefit from such time saving aspects in their daily jobs. Even professionals don't want to always have to deal with things which explicitly require a professional. Excellence in design doesn't necessarily have to result in awkwardness. The fact that even the mass of unskilled consumers benefit from this is a completely different issue. The point is that what's good for unskilled people can be equally good for skilled people who no by themselves how to provoke trouble if they really want it. ;-) Debian IMHO should be aimed toward the skilled technical user and those who are already Linux skilled. There is no other dist that is trying to fill this role. [ ... ] Where's the problem (other than that *you* don't care) to make Debian comfortable even for the skilled technical user? Hey, i'm skilled enough to handle all this stuff but it would be *really* nice if i wouldn't need to have to be skilled to be able to to certain standard tasks which should rather be automated. That's what computers are good for and i love to sppend my time with other things than being forced to make my hands dirty even if things could be solutioned once and for all for me and everybody else (newbies included). Does it have to be hard to be superior? The key to debians future is not market sales of its dist. Debian like UNIX will succeed because it is possible to learn how everything works, and it is designed to accomplish a technical not a commercial goal. It is an excellent example of the fusion of pedagogy and production, of fashion and function. I don't want to argue about Debian's future nor do i want to redefine any goals of the project. But you shouldn't either BTW. Yes, i've learned my share and now what? Do i still have to use a system which lets me explicitly feel that i *had* to learn my share to take advantage of it? Or should i better switch to SuSE now and renounce at all what makes Debian superior, just to not waste my time with things i already know and don't need to learn again and which my system could do all alone without my involvement? For professional jobs i need a system which is easy to maintain and which saves my valuable time without requiring the knowledge i've had to acquire. Hey, installations are terribly bothersome processes and Debian's installation is the most cumbersome and lengthy of them all. I'd want to have an installation which would save me quite some hassle and would save me the need to help out my friends when the try installing Debian on their own. Why shouldn't an independent company do something about it? I'd happily pay for a Debian diskset which features a dead easy install and maintenance if it really saves me the precious time i could use for more worthwhile things. What's so bad about that? Please let's clearly differentiate: What Debian is about is a matter of Debian developers. But what an entrepreneur's work based on the Debian distribution is about is a whole different thing. If you don't care about this perspective than just don't bother about it. This is a matter of getting Debian out into the market and making it *really* attractive not only for hackers. I for one would rather base my work on an enhanced and made easy Debian product sold for 59,95 US$ saving me all the need to apply my own expertise than to have to rely on a vanilla Debian from the net requiring that i deal with it the hard way. The latter is a fine product for hackerish people like you. But not everybody wants to be a hacker or devoted sysadmin with any other interests. We are not talking about plain Debian as it stands now but about another project which is simply and only based on Debian. Don't get confused about it please. Thank you, P. *8^) PS: To all: Please *never* CC me. Thanks! -- - Paul Seelig [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- African Music Archive - Institute for Ethnology and Africa Studies Johannes Gutenberg-University - Forum 6 - 55099 Mainz/Germany --- http://www.uni-mainz.de/~pseelig -
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Paul Seelig wrote: Please don't let's start *this* kind of discussion yet again. It's *not* about appeasing to the masses of unskilled consumers. It's about increasing ease of installation, use and maintenance. Skilled people definitely benefit from such time saving aspects in their daily jobs. Even professionals don't want to always have to deal with things which explicitly require a professional. Excellence in design doesn't necessarily have to result in awkwardness. The fact that even the mass of unskilled consumers benefit from this is a completely different issue. The point is that what's good for unskilled people can be equally good for skilled people who no by themselves how to provoke trouble if they really want it. ;-) As an experienced Debian user, I'll second these sentiments. Since buzz I've been waiting for the Debian installation process to become a (as it should be) 30 minute process, hopefully with some tools included for mass installations. I use Debian myself exclusively but have to hesitate before recommending it to others new to Linux because the process of getting started is harder than it should be. I also am disappointed with the attitude of some people towards making these things easier to do. Is it some kind of techno-snobbery, maybe? Making things easier does not necessitate dumbing-down things for more competent users. Once up and running, a Debian system is far more maintainable than the alternatives -- a great factor in on-going ease of use. Can some focus be brought to getting there with similar ease? I've been with Debian for over 2 years now and would be sad to have to abandon it in the long run because of 'we don't do that' politicking instead of pragmatism amongst developers. -tl .. please forgive my abrupt ending hre - but my conection is xtrememleyyhiclmelyey BAD hiccuppy etc must sign off - EF D8 33 68 B3 E3 E9 D2 C1 3E 51 22 8A AA 7B 98
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 07:14:35PM +, thomas lakofski wrote: On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Paul Seelig wrote: Can some focus be brought to getting there with similar ease? I've been with Debian for over 2 years now and would be sad to have to abandon it in the long run because of 'we don't do that' politicking instead of pragmatism amongst developers. My original point was that this is probably not the sort of thing that 'just happens' - it is much more likely to happen in a commercial environment, where it is important, not just an idea of something that might be nice. Being volunteers, we can't just go around saying it should be this way, someone else do it - it just doesn't work like that. If you really want something, start working on it... Obviously, given the lack of an easy install, this hasn't been something anyone has 'really wanted' (heh, and why would we - all of us have already managed to figure out the install..:-) My thought is that this is an area where some free software companies could be useful... spending their time making an easy install. However, I'm not sure how this might work financially, and have it still be Free (which is one of the things it might be interesting to talk about on a debian-business list). -- David Welton http://www.efn.org/~davidw Debian GNU/Linux - www.debian.org
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
thomas lakofski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I also am disappointed with the attitude of some people towards making these things easier to do. Is it some kind of techno-snobbery, maybe? In the context of initial installation, I think it's laziness -- a refusal to examine problems. That said, the boot-floppies people seem to be making progress (perhaps not as fast as everyone would like, but better than what lots of other people have been doing). -- Raul
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Raul Miller wrote: thomas lakofski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I also am disappointed with the attitude of some people towards making these things easier to do. Is it some kind of techno-snobbery, maybe? In the context of initial installation, I think it's laziness -- a refusal to examine problems. That said, the boot-floppies people seem to be making progress (perhaps not as fast as everyone would like, but better than what lots of other people have been doing). OK, since it seems that this kind of thing will probably only happen in a commercial context, maybe it would make sense to arrange commercial sponsorship of Debian in a bigger way. Debian seems to have many attributes which would make it more suitable for large corporate environments than other dists -- it's possible that if this could be pointed out to the right potential installation sites development funding would be forthcoming -- and with that, the means to pay developers to do stuff that they might not be motivated to do out of the goodness of their hearts. (I guess compare with Red Hat - Intel/Netscape/VCs) I guess I'll ask at my current place of work -- big swiss bank where they use Solaris exclusively and have expressed interest in Linux because of the benefit it would have for the bottom line. -tl .. please forgive my abrupt ending hre - but my conection is xtrememleyyhiclmelyey BAD hiccuppy etc must sign off - EF D8 33 68 B3 E3 E9 D2 C1 3E 51 22 8A AA 7B 98
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, thomas lakofski wrote: I also am disappointed with the attitude of some people towards making these things easier to do. Is it some kind of techno-snobbery, maybe? There is nothing wrong with making things easier. Simplicity is an important technical value. But there is a huge difference between a simple setup/system and automating an install to appease the needs of someone who is about to go through the process without knowledge about what is happening. Is it not better to educate this person a little first? There is nothing snobbish about teaching what you know and insisting that users be interested enough to learn something about the system that they are going to use. The real techno-snobs will teach nothing and insist on installing a system in which control of the system is impossible for the user. Not because [s]he is incapable of assimilating the skills, but simply because the politics of the situation will not allow for training and the transfer of knowledge. Making things easier does not necessitate dumbing-down things for more competent users. Once up and running, a Debian system is far more Perhaps not. But perhaps you should ask yourself the question- Why is debian like it is today and not like something else? The answer is deeply rooted in the role the developers have played in its production AND the role debian has played in the technical lives of the developers. Production for use is a two way street, and it is short and narrow. Nothing prevents what you and some others advocate from happening, except perhaps your own will and ability to facillitate it. But to insist that the creators of a system change it when they are satisfied with it is to fundamentally misunderstand what is happening here and why debian is different than a commercial dist and even why Linux is different than a commercial OS. The requirments of a commercial market driven distribution or OS is not the same as the technical system that debian is evolving into. There is no reason why debian could not be the basis of the system that you want. The freedom to take it and go in that direction is there. But you must stop insisting that others do it for you. The developers have done well and it is BECAUSE they have satisfied their personal requirments (self-interest), understood co-operation and the enlightened self interest that is the origin of the Linux community. Perhaps the answer for what you are seeking is simple. Find others who want the dist to look like you do and organize to create somthing a little different. Debian as the product of wage labour and consumer driven markets would simply not be as good for me or the developers. Is that not the very lesson of Linux/GNU itself? -steve
Re: Reality check! [was: Re: Debian goes big business?]
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 08:51:25PM +, thomas lakofski wrote: On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Raul Miller wrote: thomas lakofski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I also am disappointed with the attitude of some people towards making these things easier to do. Is it some kind of techno-snobbery, maybe? In the context of initial installation, I think it's laziness -- a refusal to examine problems. That said, the boot-floppies people seem to be making progress (perhaps not as fast as everyone would like, but better than what lots of other people have been doing). OK, since it seems that this kind of thing will probably only happen in a commercial context, maybe it would make sense to arrange commercial sponsorship of Debian in a bigger way. I think the first part of your sentence is a bit unfair. To make installation easier requires hard work. If it would be easy, it would have been long done. The trick is to keep flexibility (and don't tell me SuSE is flexibel). Doing it easy for the newbie and configurable for the experienced user requires a well though out configuration and administration system. At least for multi-installation this is currently developed on the debian-admintool list. Hardware autodetection would be another good thing, but only if implemented well and reliable. This does only work with open hardware specifications. It's not the lack of interest, but the lack of real, skilled contributions in this area, which addresses all concerns. Needless to say that any contribution is welcome, be it from volunteers or commercial organizations. But let's not drag Debian too deep into agreements with commercial contributors. If you can convince a company to write a good installation procedure, I am sure nobody will neglect it, provided it is technically convincing. Debian does make decisions on technical grounds, and I would not like to see this changed. Thanks, Marcus -- Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.Debian GNU/Linuxfinger brinkmd@ Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.orgmaster.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]for public PGP Key http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
Re: Debian goes big business?
On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 06:12:14PM -0500, Ben Pfaff wrote: Laurent Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ChL == Christian Lavoie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ChL Bottom line: Debian should remain developer controlled. What about non-developper users ? Shouldn't they have a word to say, even if they can't or do not have the time to contribute with code ? They should have `a word to say', and they do--they can subscribe to Debian lists and give their feedback and advice, which developers are free to follow or ignore. But they do not, and should not, IMO, have the privilege of voting or otherwise setting policy. Users are not developers and shouldn't presume to be. i mostly agree but wouldn't put it anywhere near that strongly. users are not developers, but they might be one day. one of the good things about debian is that users who are willing to put in some work CAN join up as developers. i started that way a few years ago, and i'll bet that most debian developers did too. craig -- craig sanders
Re: Debian goes big business?
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 20:26:12 +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 06:12:14PM -0500, Ben Pfaff wrote: Laurent Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What about non-developper users ? Shouldn't they have a word to say, even if they can't or do not have the time to contribute with code ? They should have `a word to say', and they do--they can subscribe to Debian lists and give their feedback and advice, which developers are free to follow or ignore. But they do not, and should not, IMO, have the privilege of voting or otherwise setting policy. Users are not developers and shouldn't presume to be. i mostly agree but wouldn't put it anywhere near that strongly. I would. Ben's phrasing strongly reminds me of Robert A. Heinlein; especially of the concept of TANSTAAFL and the political system he describes in Starship Troopers, where the right to vote must be earned through a tour of duty of public (not necessary military) service. In the case of Debian, users do not have the right of vote, but can earn it by becoming developers (i.e. by maintaining packages, but also by writing documentation, maintaining the website etc.). Ray -- POPULATION EXPLOSION Unique in human experience, an event which happened yesterday but which everyone swears won't happen until tomorrow. - The Hipcrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan
Re: Debian goes big business?
On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, Christian Lavoie wrote: DISCLAIMER: These are notes, and can have technical impossibilites (especially concerning '.deb'ianizing of StarOffice) - Provide single user free of charge support through internet. (email/newsgroups/knowledge base/whatever) - Provide corporate support, at a cost (cause they think it's better to pay it anyway), with the usual things sucha thing includes (on-site, 24 hours a day, programmation capable team to adapt a product) Also have the corporate support subsidise any expenses that may be incurred providing user support. - Work head-to-head against RedHat/Caldera/SuSE for publicity on Debian and promoting .deb packaging of things like StarOffice/WordPerfect No! We don't want to compete with Rad Hat, Caldera, or SuSE. We want to co-operate with them and share the market to put the squeeze on closed-source companies that sell low quality software that they don't support (I'm sure you know who I'm thinking of). Also different users have different requirements. If someone finds that Debian doesn't satisfy them then we want them to go try Red Hat, we don't want them to give up on Linux! -- I am in London and would like to meet any Linux users here. I plan to work in London for 3 - 6 months...
Re: Debian goes big business?
On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, Laurent Martelli wrote: ChL == Christian Lavoie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ChL Bottom line: Debian should remain developer controlled. What about non-developper users ? Shouldn't they have a word to say, even if they can't or do not have the time to contribute with code ? Their input is best appreciated in the bug tracking system. ;) -- I am in London and would like to meet any Linux users here. I plan to work in London for 3 - 6 months...
Re: Debian goes big business?
Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 06:12:14PM -0500, Ben Pfaff wrote: They should have `a word to say', and they do--they can subscribe to Debian lists and give their feedback and advice, which developers are free to follow or ignore. But they do not, and should not, IMO, have the privilege of voting or otherwise setting policy. Users are not developers and shouldn't presume to be. i mostly agree but wouldn't put it anywhere near that strongly. users are not developers, but they might be one day. one of the good things about debian is that users who are willing to put in some work CAN join up as developers. I guess that that's the corollary to what I'm saying. If users want to have a stronger in say in whether their advice is followed, they should be become developers. It's not that hard, and doesn't take that long. -- ...In the UNIX world, people tend to interpret `non-technical user' as meaning someone who's only ever written one device driver. --Daniel Pead
Re: Debian goes big business?
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999 10:38:54 +0100, J.H.M. Dassen wrote: On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 20:26:12 +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 06:12:14PM -0500, Ben Pfaff wrote: They should have `a word to say', and they do--they can subscribe to Debian lists and give their feedback and advice, which developers are free to follow or ignore. But they do not, and should not, IMO, have the privilege of voting or otherwise setting policy. Users are not developers and shouldn't presume to be. i mostly agree but wouldn't put it anywhere near that strongly. I would. Ben's phrasing strongly reminds me of Robert A. Heinlein; especially of the concept of TANSTAAFL and the political system he describes in Starship Troopers, where the right to vote must be earned through a tour of duty of public (not necessary military) service. In the case of Debian, users do not have the right of vote, but can earn it by becoming developers (i.e. by maintaining packages, but also by writing documentation, maintaining the website etc.). I thought it used to be that the website maintainer had no vote and that package maintainers only had to subscribe to -devel. If still true, this is not a earn voting right by public service system (per JHMD's definition) and regular direct feedback between users and developers is not actively promoted (per Ben). What's the official word on this now? I agree with Craig that Ben's view is in the right direction, but is worded too strongly. i.e.: I'm not sure when a user presumed to be a developer. I wonder if someone has been outgrowing hats lately. David Stern
Re: Debian goes big business?
Ben Pfaff said: Laurent Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What about non-developper users ? Shouldn't they have a word to say, even if they can't or do not have the time to contribute with code ? They should have `a word to say', and they do--they can subscribe to Debian lists and give their feedback and advice, which developers are free to follow or ignore. But they do not, and should not, IMO, have the privilege of voting or otherwise setting policy. Users are not developers and shouldn't presume to be. Until they go through the procedure of registerring as a developer. Then they can presume all they want. On that note: Are there any developers in the Buffalo, NY area who would be willing to meet with me to exchange key signatures? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] Just as the strength of the Internet is chaos, so the strength of our liberty depends upon the chaos and cacaphony of the unfettered speech the First Amendment protects. -- A.L.A. v. U.S. Dept. of Justice
Re: Debian goes big business?
Shawn writes: I am all for a for-profit business forming as a value-added seller of Debian products. Such a business could focus on pre-installations, packaging and marketing, and user support. I would think a very successful business could be built on such a model, and there would be no necessary control flowing either way between said business and the Debian organization. The Debian community would control the software, such a business (and there could be many of them) would control its own marketing, packaging, support program, etc. Exactly! This is just the sort of company I would love to participate in. How about the following variation on the theme? Rather than starting a for-profit business as a value-added seller of Debian products, why not start a not-for-profit, user centred, association that does the same job? It would work a bit like an automobile association. Users would join by paying a membership fee. It would be run by a board elected by the members - one vote per member. Membership fees and other income would be used to pay employees who do the work. Earlier posts have suggested that Debian itself could be turned into such an association, but I don't believe that would be in Debian's best interests. I believe Debian should remain a developer controlled, entirely volunteer, organization. A flaw with the status quo however, is that there is no mechanism to ensure that the needs of users are looked after. This is where a separate Debian User Association could fill the gap. Well actually, the gap isn't all that large, because fortunately debian users are looked after quite well at the moment. But perhaps a user association could do even better, as well as taking over some of the user assistance work that developers currently do, freeing them up to concentrate more on development. The Debian User Association (DUA) would be separate from Debian, but the two would obviously wish to cooperate closely with each other. DUA would concentrate on user issues --- value adding to the distribution in user-centred ways. It would provide user support to members --- perhaps produce regular publications that deal with frequent user issues. It would also be heavily involved in marketing. There is one big advantage of this structure over a for-profit Debian business in that, I believe, current (and future) debian users would be more enthusiastic about signing up. With a business, the profits would go to the owners, where as with the DUA, the aim of the organisation would be to serve its members. A DUA would provide a mechanism for improved user support and marketability. It would provide a mechanism for paid workers, without damaging Debian's volunteer developer model. It would be a means for promoting Debian, in keeping with the Debian spirit. Mark. _/\___/~~\ /~~\_/~~\__/~~\__Mark_Phillips /~~\_/[EMAIL PROTECTED] /~~\HE___/~~\__/~~\APTAIN_ /~~\__/~~\ __ They told me I was gullible ... and I believed them!
Re: Debian goes big business?
On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, Mark Phillips wrote: How about the following variation on the theme? Rather than starting a for-profit business as a value-added seller of Debian products, why not start a not-for-profit, user centred, association that does the same job? It would work a bit like an automobile association. Users would join by paying a membership fee. It would be run by a board elected by the members - one vote per member. Membership fees and other income would be used to pay employees who do the work. How about an ISP that in addition to user support etc also does some real technical training in Linux admin and C programming. An Internet Service Provider, that is a school and user club and Linux/Debian advocate. Where else could youth go to gget real technical training; the High Schools don't teach any thing techncial and probably couldn't do a good job of it anyway. The ISP's won't teach squat to their clients, scared they might give away some secret of the trade and have more competition. There must be some potential in this idea. What about a network of mutually supportive organizations that have some real local (geographically)presence. No one else is doeing this. What a great way to expand the technical user base and recruit youth and build the Internet at the same time. Or am I dreaming to much? -steve
Re: Debian goes big business?
DISCLAIMER: These are notes, and can have technical impossibilites (especially concerning '.deb'ianizing of StarOffice) Ok, here's the sum up: - Debian will lose its spirit if it goes itself for-profit. - A for-profit corporation based on Debian itself will eventually try to influence/own it. (Consequences: See previous comment) Bottom line: Debian should remain developer controlled. To preserve a kind of user support, we should create a DUA, which would have to do some/all of the following: - Provide single user free of charge support through internet. (email/newsgroups/knowledge base/whatever) - Provide corporate support, at a cost (cause they think it's better to pay it anyway), with the usual things sucha thing includes (on-site, 24 hours a day, programmation capable team to adapt a product) - Work head-to-head against RedHat/Caldera/SuSE for publicity on Debian and promoting .deb packaging of things like StarOffice/WordPerfect - Certification of technicians proficient in installing Debian/scripting and maintaining of a Debian system. - Be rentable, so it can re-invest back in publicity. - Cannot influence Debian developers more than the Debian users it deserves would influence it. (Meaning, you don't pay programmers, but you can kindly ask them for a bugfixe/feature ;P ) Bottom line: Co-operative society/stores based on users, democratic voting, no shareholding, all votes equals. On a side note, if a user-based co-operative society forms, would a developer-based society of the same kind be appreciated? It could for an example provide acquisition of patents (basically, to GPLized them) and work to allow developers for better recognition, allow to access better resources (like an equivalent to a membership to W3C, or other reserved to corporation bodies thingies.) and tries to augment developer communication and tries to 'enforce' major headings of the dist. (Like, say, we're switching to libc7) Christian Lavoie
Re: Debian goes big business?
To preserve a kind of user support, we should create a DUA, which would have to do some/all of the following: - Provide single user free of charge support through internet. (email/newsgroups/knowledge base/whatever) - Provide corporate support, at a cost (cause they think it's better to pay it anyway), with the usual things sucha thing includes (on-site, 24 hours a day, programmation capable team to adapt a product) - Work head-to-head against RedHat/Caldera/SuSE for publicity on Debian and promoting .deb packaging of things like StarOffice/WordPerfect - Certification of technicians proficient in installing Debian/scripting and maintaining of a Debian system. - Be rentable, so it can re-invest back in publicity. - Cannot influence Debian developers more than the Debian users it deserves would influence it. (Meaning, you don't pay programmers, but you can kindly ask them for a bugfixe/feature ;P ) Sorry replying to my own post, but how about the following: - Paying guys to maintain deb packages, package unpackaged software? High-school/college students would appreciate a lot, IMHO. Although not highly rewarding, it does include some technical knowledge, and proves some proficiency in compiling and ocnfiguration of Debian systems. Christian Lavoie
Re: Debian goes big business?
David Welton wrote: On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 04:55:29PM -0600, John Hasler wrote: Shawn writes: I am all for a for-profit business forming as a value-added seller of Debian products. Such a business could focus on pre-installations, packaging and marketing, and user support. I would think a very successful business could be built on such a model, and there would be no necessary control flowing either way between said business and the Debian organization. The Debian community would control the software, such a business (and there could be many of them) would control its own marketing, packaging, support program, etc. Exactly! This is just the sort of company I would love to participate in. This is what Prosa (www.prosa.it) is, for the record. It is something more, for the record. It's the only company (a ltd for the precision) that has carved into stone (in its statute, I mean) the obligation to comply with the open-source definition. That means that if an employee installs Windows on a company PC it can be fired. No, can is not the right verb; must is. :-) Alessandro Rubini (who wrote Linux Device Drivers, as well as the Kernel Corner column for the Linux Journal) is one of their employees. One of the founders, for the record, and beloved President. fab --
Re: Debian goes big business?
On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, Christian Lavoie wrote: - Debian will lose its spirit if it goes itself for-profit. - A for-profit corporation based on Debian itself will eventually try to influence/own it. (Consequences: See previous comment) Bottom line: Debian should remain developer controlled. I wouldn't mind it if everyone disagreed with what I'm saying. But it seems as if no one even understands what I'm saying. No one would be taking home any profit in the system I'm talking about. The core developers (the ones who currently control Debian) would be a kind of board of directors. Developers would work for Debian instead of doing it in their free time. Bottom line: Debian *will* remain developer controlled. On a side note, if a user-based co-operative society forms, would a developer-based society of the same kind be appreciated? It could for an example provide acquisition of patents (basically, to GPLized them) and work to allow developers for better recognition, allow to access better resources (like an equivalent to a membership to W3C, or other reserved to corporation bodies thingies.) and tries to augment developer communication and tries to 'enforce' major headings of the dist. (Like, say, we're switching to libc7) This sounds more like what I'm saying. Christian Lavoie -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null /--\ | pretzelgod | [EMAIL PROTECTED]| | (Eric Gillespie, Jr.) | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |---*| | That's the problem with going from a soldier to a | | politician: you actually have to sit down and listen to | | people who six months ago you would've just shot. | | --President John Sheridan, Babylon 5| \--/
Re: Debian goes big business?
ChL == Christian Lavoie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ChL Bottom line: Debian should remain developer controlled. What about non-developper users ? Shouldn't they have a word to say, even if they can't or do not have the time to contribute with code ? Laurent
Re: Debian goes big business?
Laurent Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ChL == Christian Lavoie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ChL Bottom line: Debian should remain developer controlled. What about non-developper users ? Shouldn't they have a word to say, even if they can't or do not have the time to contribute with code ? They should have `a word to say', and they do--they can subscribe to Debian lists and give their feedback and advice, which developers are free to follow or ignore. But they do not, and should not, IMO, have the privilege of voting or otherwise setting policy. Users are not developers and shouldn't presume to be.
Re: Debian goes big business?
On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 12:47:52PM -0500, Harrison, Shawn wrote: So that's what I think we should focus on. -- What is the best way to get Debian out to the world? == [EMAIL PROTECTED] == -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null Install it at your workplace, tell people, support new users - every time one of my colleagues wants a Linux box I build them a Debian disk. If you _really_ want to get Debian out into the world: The floppy install takes eight 3.5 floppies: include a lowmem disk and a disk of instructions. That makes 10: if every developer were to buy a box of disks, format them and copy the floppy images then send them to someone - thats 300+ people with a minimal distribution at a couple of US$ cost. Beg/borrow a CD copier: copy up to date CD's at a nominal cost: distribute them. [Can we do this for one developer from each country to ease the problem of net download costs ??] Stress the security and upgradeability of Debian: install RedHat and ask people to upgrade - then show them Debian with APT Just my 0.02 Euro Andy
Re: Debian goes big business?
On 19 Jan 1999 16:55:29 -0600, John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Shawn writes: I am all for a for-profit business forming as a value-added seller of Debian products. Such a business could focus on pre-installations, packaging and marketing, and user support. Exactly! This is just the sort of company I would love to participate in. I have cross-posted this to debian-devel. onShore, Inc., my company, (not yet listed on the consultants page -- too busy with work and Slink right now) sells bundled GNU/Debian systems, including hardware and support. We are resellers for most major manufacturers. We're basically a consulting company (business to business), not an ISP or box pusher. We also do a lot of open-source development and the like. FWIW, I'm actually starting a push right now to offer bundled Debian/Sparc boxes, since we're also Sun resellers, and since the Sparc architecture has a lower TCO and scales better than x86. We operate out of Chicago and NYC (312 850-5200 and 212 254-0063). -- .Adam Di [EMAIL PROTECTED]URL:http://www.onShore.com/
Re: Debian goes big business?
On Wed, 20 Jan 1999 10:08:53 -0600 (CST), Eric Gillespie, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I wouldn't mind it if everyone disagreed with what I'm saying. But it seems as if no one even understands what I'm saying. Sorry about the plug for my own company in my last message. However, I think I do know what you want. Personally, I'd rather use the existing framework of SPI, and focus on increasing revenue so that Debian can start funding developers (i.e., hardware for porters or mirrors, then maybe growing to a small salary for core people like FTP archive maintainers, the security team, release managers). -- .Adam Di [EMAIL PROTECTED]URL:http://www.onShore.com/
Re: Debian goes big business?
Shawn writes: I am all for a for-profit business forming as a value-added seller of Debian products. Such a business could focus on pre-installations, packaging and marketing, and user support. I would think a very successful business could be built on such a model, and there would be no necessary control flowing either way between said business and the Debian organization. The Debian community would control the software, such a business (and there could be many of them) would control its own marketing, packaging, support program, etc. Exactly! This is just the sort of company I would love to participate in. I have cross-posted this to debian-devel. -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler) Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI
Re: Debian goes big business?
On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 04:55:29PM -0600, John Hasler wrote: Shawn writes: I am all for a for-profit business forming as a value-added seller of Debian products. Such a business could focus on pre-installations, packaging and marketing, and user support. I would think a very successful business could be built on such a model, and there would be no necessary control flowing either way between said business and the Debian organization. The Debian community would control the software, such a business (and there could be many of them) would control its own marketing, packaging, support program, etc. Exactly! This is just the sort of company I would love to participate in. This is what Prosa (www.prosa.it) is, for the record. I'll be translating the web pages soon, so that non-italian speakers can see what it's all about:- Alessandro Rubini (who wrote Linux Device Drivers, as well as the Kernel Corner column for the Linux Journal) is one of their employees. Ciao, -- David Welton http://www.efn.org/~davidw Debian GNU/Linux - www.debian.org
