Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
There's not really a solution to that, ever, for an OS distributed on the Internet. MS distributes boot floppies with their non-upgrade OS products for the same reason. Well, there is one solution.. just convince the BIOS manufacturers to include PPP code in the BIOS which can dialup and download the boot code. :-) Just buy a machine that allows CDROM booting.
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
On Aug 21, Paul Wade wrote 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. There's not really a solution to that, ever, for an OS distributed on the Internet. MS distributes boot floppies with their non-upgrade OS products for the same reason. Well, there is one solution.. just convince the BIOS manufacturers to include PPP code in the BIOS which can dialup and download the boot code. :-) 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: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
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
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
On Fri, 22 Aug 1997 15:34:41 +0200 (MET DST), E.L. Meijer \(Eric\) wrote: This is why there have ben how many changes to 1.3.1, and it's still called 1.3.1? That is an error you can criticize. It was not done on purpose, and therefore you cannot claim it is a severe flaw in the policy. Maybe you should talk to Bruce about it. I've seen him email regarding the issue, and not only was it intensional, but it seems to be the way things will be done from now on. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
Bruce writes: The FTP update is easy. I just took a look at the ftp site. Can't say I agree with you (though it is better). -- John HaslerThis posting is in the public domain. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do with it what you will. Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind. Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
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
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
Bruce writes: The FTP update is easy. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I just took a look at the ftp site. Can't say I agree with you (though it is better). Have you tried dselect's FTP method yet? It does that update automaticaly. That's why I said it's easy. Bruce -- Can you get your operating system fixed when you need it? Linux - the supportable operating system. http://www.debian.org/support.html Bruce Perens K6BP [EMAIL PROTECTED] 510-215-3502 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:14:05 -0700 (PDT), George Bonser wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Mike Schmitz wrote: 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. Oh, horsehockey. Bandwidth does not grow on trees. Neither do systems. It is impossible to plant a seed and grow a system, it takes money. If you can show that you are a non-profit organization, it provides incentive for people to assist your project IF they find it worthy of their support. That's not a universal concensus. To me it's a turn off. A financial break for a community to help itself is not a bad idea. I suspect you are more than a little paranoid. Anarchy only works when all parties think exactly alike which is oxymoronic to the term. That's foolish. Anarchy does work, because no man is ever given the upper hand in a conflict soley by his position. I'm not a socialistI've owned my own (non-corporate) business for over 8 years. I know what expenses are, about marketing, and about making money, and I have made money using Debian. I'd be a hipocrit if I said other people could not...except for this creature we call Debian. When I first started playing with deb, Debian was an idea. It was a bunch of files from a bunch of people, that made using linux better. The distribution existed by the sheer will of the people who built it. The ethic was that all work was done for free and released under GNU. A donation to 'debian' meant supporting the deveopers directly in some way, offering bandwidth, and contributing to the project. There were no direct bills to pay. The project could never fold unless the developers decided to just walk away. Then Debian suddenly had to get orginized, and become 'something'. It's now a company. It now wants money. It now has expensives. It now determines what is and is not 'official'. I don't like it. It was fine the way it was before. Sure, you can DREAM that such a system can flourish without money but if it becomes large enough (which Debian has), it starts to require real resources that only money can buy. Sure, you might be able to get the telephone company to donate a T1 ... if they can deduct it. Are you high? - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
Dave Cinege: A donation to 'debian' meant supporting the deveopers directly in some way, offering bandwidth, and contributing to the project. There were no direct bills to pay. The project could never fold unless the developers decided to just walk away. Then Debian suddenly had to get orginized, and become 'something'. It's now a company. It now wants money. It now has expensives. It now determines what is and is not 'official'. I don't like it. It was fine the way it was before. Yeah, it was fine to have a screwed up 1.0 version on InfoMagic, it was fine to see the last two versions on InfoMagic sets come out crippled and severely crippled respectively. NOT. And InfoMagic was the only way I could get a Debian distribution until recently. It seems to me that the people currently `venting their shit' on Debian cannot imagine what is good for an ordinary user like me who isn't able to download an entire distribution from the net and doesn't care about the latest minute patches. I appreciate a _stable_ distribution on CD-ROM that is easily available in my next door book shop. Therefore, the Official Debian CDRom is the best thing that recently happened to the Debian project. If Official Debian CD's will become widely available, that is a good thing as well, and if a new revision numbering scheme can help, it is in my interest and in the interest of the large group of users who want _access_ to a high quality distribution. Eric Meijer -- E.L. Meijer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | tel. office +31 40 2472189 Eindhoven Univ. of Technology | tel. lab. +31 40 2475032 Lab. for Catalysis and Inorg. Chem. (TAK) | tel. fax+31 40 2455054 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
On Fri, 22 Aug 1997 11:13:22 +0200 (MET DST), E.L. Meijer \(Eric\) wrote: Dave Cinege: A donation to 'debian' meant supporting the deveopers directly in some way, offering bandwidth, and contributing to the project. There were no direct bills to pay. The project could never fold unless the developers decided to just walk away. Then Debian suddenly had to get orginized, and become 'something'. It's now a company. It now wants money. It now has expensives. It now determines what is and is not 'official'. I don't like it. It was fine the way it was before. Yeah, it was fine to have a screwed up 1.0 version on InfoMagic, it was fine to see the last two versions on InfoMagic sets come out crippled and severely crippled respectively. NOT. And InfoMagic was the only way I could get a Debian distribution until recently. And the simple existence of the corp did not fix it! It seems to me that the people currently `venting their shit' on Debian cannot imagine what is good for an ordinary user like me who isn't able to download an entire distribution from the net and doesn't care about the latest minute patches. I appreciate a _stable_ distribution on CD-ROM that is easily available in my next door book shop. Therefore, the Official Debian CDRom is the best thing that recently happened to the Debian project. Bull. It puts other at odds with the 'officials' in the project. There is no reason someone couldn't have come up with this 'stable' release CD on their own. There is no reseason Bruce could not have done it, and offered it in his personal capacity. If Official Debian CD's will become widely available, that is a good thing as well, and if a new revision numbering scheme can help, it is in my interest and in the interest of the large group of users who want _access_ to a high quality distribution. If you buy a CD that says 1.3 on it you can't be sure what you're getting. Was that the 1.3 that had a bug with XX peice of hardware and couldn't install. Hiding things from the users is typical Microsoft, large company, marketing *tatics* They don't care if it runs, just that you buy the product. That's not right. Certainly not for a (supposedly) free software project. Listen, getting CD's out is a good thing. But: A) It is not right for Debian Inc, to have an official part in it. B) The distribution should not change to suite the needs of cookie cutters. - http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
Dave Cinege: On Fri, 22 Aug 1997 11:13:22 +0200 (MET DST), E.L. Meijer \(Eric\) wrote: Dave Cinege: A donation to 'debian' meant supporting the deveopers directly in some way, offering bandwidth, and contributing to the project. There were no direct bills to pay. The project could never fold unless the developers decided to just walk away. Then Debian suddenly had to get orginized, and become 'something'. It's now a company. It now wants money. It now has expensives. It now determines what is and is not 'official'. I don't like it. It was fine the way it was before. Yeah, it was fine to have a screwed up 1.0 version on InfoMagic, it was fine to see the last two versions on InfoMagic sets come out crippled and severely crippled respectively. NOT. And InfoMagic was the only way I could get a Debian distribution until recently. And the simple existence of the corp did not fix it! It seems to me that the people currently `venting their shit' on Debian cannot imagine what is good for an ordinary user like me who isn't able to download an entire distribution from the net and doesn't care about the latest minute patches. I appreciate a _stable_ distribution on CD-ROM that is easily available in my next door book shop. Therefore, the Official Debian CDRom is the best thing that recently happened to the Debian project. Bull. It puts other at odds with the 'officials' in the project. There is no reason someone couldn't have come up with this 'stable' release CD on their own. There is no reseason Bruce could not have done it, and offered it in his personal capacity. Bull to you. I know Debian. A lot of people know Debian. Fewer people know Bruce. One day, Bruce will leave the project (thanks for the great work, Bruce!), but Debian will remain. If I see an official Debian CD I know that it is made by someone who knows what (s)he is doing, and who tested it. What do I know if I see Debian CD `by Bruce Perens', unless I know who this is? The point is not that `anybody' couldn't have done it, the point is some kind of certification for which you don't need to know the people who did it personally. And whatever you say, the Official 1.3.1 CD was the best Debian CD I ever had. If Official Debian CD's will become widely available, that is a good thing as well, and if a new revision numbering scheme can help, it is in my interest and in the interest of the large group of users who want _access_ to a high quality distribution. If you buy a CD that says 1.3 on it you can't be sure what you're getting. Was that the 1.3 that had a bug with XX peice of hardware and couldn't install. You can never be sure what you're getting since bugs that show up in the future cannot be known. That's why we need a well tested Official Debian CD. Hiding things from the users is typical Microsoft, large company, marketing *tatics* They don't care if it runs, just that you buy the product. That's not right. Certainly not for a (supposedly) free software project. Listen, getting CD's out is a good thing. But: A) It is not right for Debian Inc, to have an official part in it. It _is_ a good thing, because Debian is going to get the bad name or the credits for a CD. You and I know that InfoMagic screwed up several times. Most people will conclude that Debian doesn't work if they bought the recent InfoMagic set. Now Debian can refer people to the official set, and take responsibility and credit for it. B) The distribution should not change to suite the needs of cookie cutters. The distribution hasn't changed to suit the needs of any cookie cutter. Only the naming scheme. This is a minor detail. Eric Meijer -- E.L. Meijer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | tel. office +31 40 2472189 Eindhoven Univ. of Technology | tel. lab. +31 40 2475032 Lab. for Catalysis and Inorg. Chem. (TAK) | tel. fax+31 40 2455054 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
Dave Cinege: You just don't get it. Debian is not supposed to be a company!!! Debian is supposed to be the efforts of it's developers! When you say Debian Inc should do xx, you're not saying the devs should do it but the few (one?) guys directly in charge of Debian Inc. This is the last email I'll spend on this issue. Of course debian is the result of the efforts of it's developpers. But it is a joint effort. It is coordinated, and people divide tasks among them. The `guys directly in charge of Debian Inc.' are democratically chosen by the developpers. Debian is not a company in which the leadership decides what the developpers do, the developpers assign the `leadership' certain tasks. After some time, the `leaders' are re-elected, or not. Pure anarchism is rarely a good system to get anything done. Anyone can stand up and make a CD. That's OK. In the same way that the distribution is put together, an official CD is put together. It is important that this CD is known to originate from the debian developpers, as some kind of (limited) certification to the outside world that it is a well tested CD. B) The distribution should not change to suite the needs of cookie cutters. The distribution hasn't changed to suit the needs of any cookie cutter. Only the naming scheme. This is a minor detail. This is why there have ben how many changes to 1.3.1, and it's still called 1.3.1? That is an error you can criticize. It was not done on purpose, and therefore you cannot claim it is a severe flaw in the policy. Does the word frozen mean anything to you? Ice cubes. Eric Meijer -- E.L. Meijer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | tel. office +31 40 2472189 Eindhoven Univ. of Technology | tel. lab. +31 40 2475032 Lab. for Catalysis and Inorg. Chem. (TAK) | tel. fax+31 40 2455054 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
On Aug 21, George Bonser wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Mike Schmitz wrote: 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. Oh, horsehockey. Bandwidth does not grow on trees. Neither do systems. It is impossible to plant a seed and grow a system, it takes money. If you can show that you are a non-profit organization, it provides incentive for people to assist your project IF they find it worthy of their support. A financial break for a community to help itself is not a bad idea. I suspect you are more than a little paranoid. Anarchy only works when all parties think exactly alike which is oxymoronic to the term. Sure, you can DREAM that such a system can flourish without money but if it becomes large enough (which Debian has), it starts to require real resources that only money can buy. Sure, you might be able to get the telephone company to donate a T1 ... if they can deduct it. And we are talking about a few bucks per user (Amount of debian treasury divided by number of users), and not about thousands and millions of cash. Got it? Someone has to pay everytime, and no one is willing to do it forever with his own money, or do you? Marcus a little annoyed about false understanding of autonomy -- Rhubarb is no Egyptian god. Marcus Brinkmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:14:05 -0700 (PDT), George Bonser wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Mike Schmitz wrote: Oh, horsehockey. Bandwidth does not grow on trees. Neither do systems. It is impossible to plant a seed and grow a system, it takes money. If you can show that you are a non-profit organization, it provides incentive for people to assist your project IF they find it worthy of their support. That's not a universal concensus. To me it's a turn off. And your point is? No matter what decision is made, with a group this size, someone is going to be turned off. Live with it or not. When I first started playing with deb, Debian was an idea. It was a bunch of files from a bunch of people, that made using linux better. The distribution existed by the sheer will of the people who built it. The ethic was that all work was done for free and released under GNU. And all of the work is still done for free and still released under GPL - so what's your point!? A donation to 'debian' meant supporting the deveopers directly in some way, offering bandwidth, and contributing to the project. There were no direct bills to pay. The project could never fold unless the developers decided to just walk away. When you say donation above, what do you mean? Time? Hardware? Money? I remember when Ian M. first came on the scene with the idea of the Debian GNU/Linux project - he asked for hardware and money. I didn't feel very comfortable about giving to some guy on the net so I donated a little time. I've been with Debian since before 0.91 and can honestly sat that it has improved under the current structure. Now when we donate to the project there is some comfort in knowing that it's money going to an organization where there's some accountability. And of course, if I want to donate directly to the developers I can. If I want to donate hardware, I can. If I want to donate services, I can. And hey! If I want to claim a tax deduction, for the donation I can. Admittedly, my contribution to the project has been far less than many. What's been your contribution? Then Debian suddenly had to get orginized, and become 'something'. It's now a company. It now wants money. It now has expensives. It now determines what is and is not 'official'. I don't like it. It was fine the way it was before. It was not suddenly. It was discussed by those who have donated their time by being package maintainers, or site administers, or documentation writers. The want of money has never changed. It's always been asked of the public to donate time|energy|hardware|money if they feel it's warranted. The Official part of this is the CD. That ABSOLUTELY was necessary. Too many CD's were shipped out by CD ROM vendors that were broken. So Bruce had to take time out to develop a CD ROM image that those entities could use as a master. My advise to anyone, and everyone who is not satisfied with Debian: Do something about it. If you don't like the package format, then develop a new format and present it to the current set of developers. Make you case. If you don't like the direction the developers have chosen for their product, then make your own. Base it on Debian or Red Hat or Slackware if you want - roll your own from scratch if that's what suits you. No one is forcing you to use this product. No one is forcing you to donate *anything* to the people who make this distribution. So either contribute constructively to the project or don't. If you're so bothered by it all, then make a Psychosis Debian CD and see if it sells. If so, great!! If not, too bad. Chuck -- Chuck Stickelman, Owner E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Practical Network DesignVoice: (419) 529-3841 9 Chambers Road FAX:(419) 529-3625 Mansfield, OH 44906-1302 USA -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
Hi, Dave == Dave Cinege [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dave Bull. It puts other at odds with the 'officials' in the Dave project. There is no reason someone couldn't have come up with Dave this 'stable' release CD on their own. There is no reseason Dave Bruce could not have done it, and offered it in his personal Dave capacity. Bruce is not offering an Official CD. Debian is. Is that so hard to understand? Dave If you buy a CD that says 1.3 on it you can't be sure what Dave you're getting. Was that the 1.3 that had a bug with XX peice of Dave hardware and couldn't install. Hiding things from the users is Dave typical Microsoft, large company, marketing *tatics* They don't Dave care if it runs, just that you buy the product. That's not Dave right. Certainly not for a (supposedly) free software project. When we say version X, we mean version X -- the intent is never to have a versioned release be mutable. Yes, we made a mistake. If you think it damns us forever, Redhat makes a fine distribution. Hope you have better luck with it. Dave Listen, getting CD's out is a good thing. But: Dave A) It is not right for Debian Inc, to have an official part in Dave it. In you opinion. Dave B) The distribution should not change to suite the needs of Dave cookie cutters. I dn't see why not, as long as it retains the technical qualities. After all, CD retailers are Debian users too, just like anyone on this list. I have no interest in discriminating against any group of users. manoj -- There is no law that vulgarity and literary excellence cannot coexist. Trevor Hodge Manoj Srivastava url:mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile, Alabama USAurl:http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
Bruce writes: Have you tried dselect's FTP method yet? It does that update automaticaly. That's why I said it's easy. From the dslect help screen: ftp - Install using ftp. Installation using ftp, you must know a ftp site and the correct directory for a debian distribution. But what is the correct directory? It doesn't seem to be documented anywhere, and it is not self-evident from looking at the ftp site. I have used it quite successfully, but I do not consider this evidence that it is adequately documented. Then there is this: Note: this is not part of the standard dpkg package and is more likely to produce errors due to differences between the Packages files that are downloaded during the Update phase and what the archive actually contains during the Install phase. Pretty likely to scare off a newbie. -- John HaslerThis posting is in the public domain. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do with it what you will. Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind. Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
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 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
From: Paul Wade [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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. Of course you are welcome to do so. Since then, the stable ftp archive has had at least 2 changes which warrant a DEFINITE DISTINCTION from those CD sets. I agree. This is what the revision number should be for. This was a procedure mistake, and the fact that the archive manager was on a well-earned vacation probably contributed to it. 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. The problem is that _any_ decision to make a mass pressing of Debian is likely to give you remaining inventory if there is only one month of shelf life. Your analysis of cost is only valid if we do not package the CD with other stuff like a book. Like a _book_about_debian_. And we want that. Maybe the people who bought those CD sets will start thinking they've been fooled a bit and will hate Debian more than Microsoft. I don't think so. The FTP update is easy. If you want up-to-the-minute on your CD, buy from Paul Wade. We'll see who succeeds in the market. Dave used some strong language because he is rightfully pissed off. Well, he'd be taken more seriously if he argued without the language. You too. Those of us who actually organize CD images would be better off if Debian would go back to the good old numbering scheme I'm the guy who got the complaints from all of those CDs other people organized. That's one reason I organize one now. Another reason is because I want those CDs to be a commodity, which makes them cheap and keeps any one CD manufacturer from making too much profit. 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. Well, it's nice to have you around, but I think you'd do best making CD-Rs of unstable. I sincerely believe that the stable release has outgrown the CD-R market. Thanks Bruce -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
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. Perhaps Microsoft does. Perhaps it doesn't. But, I'm almost certain Greenbush Technologies Corporation does. ;-) ^^^ Paul Serice -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Paul Serice wrote: Does Microsoft contribute to my personal autonomy? If so, I prefer anarchy. Perhaps Microsoft does. Perhaps it doesn't. But, I'm almost certain Greenbush Technologies Corporation does. ;-) ^^^ There is nothing in my articles of incorporation that states a goal of contributing to the personal autonomy of others. If that is a side-effect of business operations, I hope the beneficiaries are only 'good guys'. If this is really a 'civilized' world, then I hope my little corporation contributes some anarchy to it. Autonomy is partly a matter of mind and attitude, anyway. You can achieve that with or without incorporating. The real reason I incorporated is that I like being called 'Mr. President'. +--+ + Paul Wade Greenbush Technologies Corporation + + mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.greenbush.com/ + +--+ + http://www.greenbush.com/cds.html Now shipping version 1.3.? + +--+ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
