Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Mon, 2003-02-10 at 02:47, Greg Meyer wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday 09 February 2003 06:05 pm, Gustavo Franco wrote: On Sun, 2003-02-09 at 15:36, Steve Fox wrote: On Sat, 2003-02-08 at 13:36, Gustavo Franco wrote: Any person has the same view of my messages as Lonnie? Just a lurker on this thread (since it's really gone awry), but I would say definitely not. You've been a very good diplomat for the Debian project. Thank you. I was sent a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] talking about the topics discussed here, this thread will be reported in the next issue of Debian Weekly News(DWN) [1]. [1] = http://www.infodrom.org/~joey/Writing/DWN/dwn-2003-06.html Bye, In my estimation, you have completely misrepresented the discussion that was going on here by substituting your own wishful thinking and by using out of context comments by people committed to making Mandrake successful. That is not being a good diplomat for the Debian Project. You took this thread where you wanted it to go, which was a far different place than when it started. Stupid estimation! My name isn't Martin Schulze!!! I was sent a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the url of this thread, if you can read my name isn't cited in the news.The DWN issue #6 wasn't released feel free to disturb joey(Martin Schulze) about that. Bye, -- Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Mon, 2003-02-10 at 03:22, Steve Fox wrote: On Sun, 2003-02-09 at 22:47, Greg Meyer wrote: In my estimation, you have completely misrepresented the discussion that was going on here by substituting your own wishful thinking and by using out of context comments by people committed to making Mandrake successful. That is not being a good diplomat for the Debian Project. You took this thread where you wanted it to go, which was a far different place than when it started. You guys seem to have it ass backward. He was simply making suggestions, which were shot down. He wasn't trying to force anyone to do anything. They proposed to create Mandrake Linux development as community similar to how the Debian project is organised, which is why John Goerzen from Debian contributes to the discussion. Austin Acton wonders how Debian maintains responsibilities and resources. Sounds pretty harmless to me. The only thing in doubt is the reference to 'Mandrake developers', which makes it sound like Mandrakesoft employees were in this discussion, which they were not. Feel free to send corrections/suggestions to Martin Schulze, the responsible of that text.I was sent only the url containing the archive of cooker ML pointing to this thread (started as the end is inevitable) and a slashdot article. And yes, maybe in a week or two the people will damn me about MandrakeSoft bankruptcy.It's a Debian Project conspiracy! troll ;) Bye, -- Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On 10 Feb 2003, Gustavo Franco wrote: On Mon, 2003-02-10 at 02:47, Greg Meyer wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday 09 February 2003 06:05 pm, Gustavo Franco wrote: On Sun, 2003-02-09 at 15:36, Steve Fox wrote: On Sat, 2003-02-08 at 13:36, Gustavo Franco wrote: [snip] [edited for clarity; NO CHANGE IN WORDS] Stupid estimation! My name isn't Martin Schulze!!! ^^ ?? I was sent a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ^^^^ This is at the least ambiguous. You cannot blame people for misreading your messages if the language is not unambiguous. Did you mean to say I was sent a mail FROM [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... Blame it on bad language first before blaming it on bad intentions! (And that counts for both sides in this selective reading competition subthread...) Guy Bormann P.S.: Don't bother throwing baits, I won't bite...
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 10 February 2003 12:22 am, Steve Fox wrote: The only thing in doubt is the reference to 'Mandrake developers', which makes it sound like Mandrakesoft employees were in this discussion, which they were not. The article insinuates that the community was planning what to do in the aftermath of the failure of MandrakeSoft, which is not why the thread was started. It is an inaccurate representation of the original discussion. - -- Greg -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+R52zwDpHP6GALAARAmh3AJwLAANJk1IhFgPdZGSig6OnUhqt/wCfXa9o HtEvDhBF6/gC6NaQ3rgl9i0= =z9Oa -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 10 February 2003 03:15 am, Gustavo Franco wrote: Stupid estimation! My name isn't Martin Schulze!!! I was sent a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the url of this thread, if you can read my name isn't cited in the news.The DWN issue #6 wasn't released feel free to disturb joey(Martin Schulze) about that. My apologies to you personally then, and I have taken your advice. - -- Greg -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+R53mwDpHP6GALAARArFuAKCSzlaKRXPSAr07nzq9Mg5/8yxrwwCdEiEZ kNvXPfIsLnR2jg+WK9APJ2E= =Bl8N -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Mon, 10 Feb 2003, Greg Meyer wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 10 February 2003 12:22 am, Steve Fox wrote: The only thing in doubt is the reference to 'Mandrake developers', which makes it sound like Mandrakesoft employees were in this discussion, which they were not. The article insinuates that the community was planning what to do in the aftermath of the failure of MandrakeSoft, which is not why the thread was started. It is an inaccurate representation of the original discussion. Blablabla... All you write is most probably true and if so I totally agree the author should be summarly executed (for the humor impaired : *flash* *flash* sarcasm! *flash* *flash*). However, Gustavo was also misrepresented as being the originator of the comments in the referred article while he was actually referred to this mailing list AFTER the fact. aaaiiipp (*gasp of air*) On the other hand, he was getting obnoxious about the fact that he was misunderstood about this while in fact his not so complete mastering of the English language was to blame. And now I am REALLY out of this stupid selective reading competition. If you don't believe, go back to the mail archive and REALLY read and read and read and read what was actually typed (in this subthread)(and I am really not so stupid to believe that all of it represents what was intended)! Guy Bormann
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Mon, 2003-02-10 at 10:41, Greg Meyer wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 10 February 2003 03:15 am, Gustavo Franco wrote: Stupid estimation! My name isn't Martin Schulze!!! I was sent a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the url of this thread, if you can read my name isn't cited in the news.The DWN issue #6 wasn't released feel free to disturb joey(Martin Schulze) about that. My apologies to you personally then, and I have taken your advice. Do you understand? Sorry for the exclamation. Bye, -- Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Mon, 2003-02-10 at 10:34, Guy.Bormann wrote: On 10 Feb 2003, Gustavo Franco wrote: On Mon, 2003-02-10 at 02:47, Greg Meyer wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday 09 February 2003 06:05 pm, Gustavo Franco wrote: On Sun, 2003-02-09 at 15:36, Steve Fox wrote: On Sat, 2003-02-08 at 13:36, Gustavo Franco wrote: [snip] [edited for clarity; NO CHANGE IN WORDS] Stupid estimation! My name isn't Martin Schulze!!! ^^ ?? troll. I was sent a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ^^^^ This is at the least ambiguous. You cannot blame people for misreading your messages if the language is not unambiguous. Did you mean to say I was sent a mail FROM [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... Sorry. Blame it on bad language first before blaming it on bad intentions! (And that counts for both sides in this selective reading competition subthread...) Talking about bad language, is the text in DWN unreleased[1] in the bad language? No? So, it's ambiguous too.The errors was associated with me, and my comments here.But the it's in good language.Strange, no? [1] = http://www.infodrom.org/~joey/Writing/DWN/dwn-2003-06.html Bye, -- Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] p.s: You're trolling! You aren't discussing about the subjects covered here.Why?
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
this might be just the place to put a plug in for the mandrake-ot mail list, something created by a mandrake user, to help keep S-N-R to the min. [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the e-mail address, and it uses sympa so the commands should be something most can handle, and if they need any further help, mail me off list and I will send the rest of the invite/instruction offlist. et
[Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
Pixel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Stefan van der Eijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: and move the idea's and effort into making debian a better distro instead of duplicating the effort? one main difference with debian, is that mandrake (tries to) takes into account the users's needs (and not only the developers's needs) I think this is not really accurate. I think a more accurate characterization is that the needs of Debian's users are not necessarily the same as the needs of Mandrake's users, although both distributions are expanding their capabilities and creating more overlap. As an example: Debian is used a lot in mission-critical server applications. These may be situations where you don't have physical access to the box, so it's important to be able to do upgrades over a ssh or serial line without a reboot. Mandrake is used a lot in workstations, so it's important to have hardware autodetection and the latest in desktop apps. Now, it's certainly possible to use Mandrake in a mission-critical server application, and it's certainly possible to use Debian on a workstation, and have an excellent system in each case. I'm sure there are plenty of people doing both. But if Debian's user base is heavy with server admins and Mandrake's is heavy with desktop users, the feedback these sets of users are going to be sending is different, and so listening to users is going to produce a different result. Debian users may ask for things like serial console support, whereas Mandrake users may ask for things like USB printer autodetection (just hypothetical examples.) another difference is the timing of stabilisation: someone told me that debian is either not uptodate (the stable branch), or less stable than Mandrake (testing) This is probably true, though it is more a fluke of timing than overriding philosophy. -- John
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Sat, 2003-02-08 at 13:36, Gustavo Franco wrote: Any person has the same view of my messages as Lonnie? Just a lurker on this thread (since it's really gone awry), but I would say definitely not. You've been a very good diplomat for the Debian project. -- Steve Fox http://k-lug.org
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Sun, 2003-02-09 at 15:36, Steve Fox wrote: On Sat, 2003-02-08 at 13:36, Gustavo Franco wrote: Any person has the same view of my messages as Lonnie? Just a lurker on this thread (since it's really gone awry), but I would say definitely not. You've been a very good diplomat for the Debian project. Thank you. I was sent a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] talking about the topics discussed here, this thread will be reported in the next issue of Debian Weekly News(DWN) [1]. [1] = http://www.infodrom.org/~joey/Writing/DWN/dwn-2003-06.html Bye, -- Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Sun, 2003-02-09 at 18:05, Gustavo Franco wrote: I was sent a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] talking about the topics discussed here, this thread will be reported in the next issue of Debian Weekly News(DWN) [1]. [1] = http://www.infodrom.org/~joey/Writing/DWN/dwn-2003-06.html Brilliant! What a good idea! Now they can print a stupid article which takes real emails with real discussions, and advertise a moronic headline which is 180 degrees from the truth. I wanted a system where Mandrake can help the community, and the community can better serve the distro, and now there's a pubic article stating the opposite. Good work Gus. You're a hero. Austin -- Austin Acton Hon.B.Sc. Synthetic Organic Chemist, Teaching Assistant Department of Chemistry, York University, Toronto MandrakeClub Volunteer (www.mandrakeclub.com) homepage: www.groundstate.ca
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday 09 February 2003 06:05 pm, Gustavo Franco wrote: On Sun, 2003-02-09 at 15:36, Steve Fox wrote: On Sat, 2003-02-08 at 13:36, Gustavo Franco wrote: Any person has the same view of my messages as Lonnie? Just a lurker on this thread (since it's really gone awry), but I would say definitely not. You've been a very good diplomat for the Debian project. Thank you. I was sent a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] talking about the topics discussed here, this thread will be reported in the next issue of Debian Weekly News(DWN) [1]. [1] = http://www.infodrom.org/~joey/Writing/DWN/dwn-2003-06.html Bye, In my estimation, you have completely misrepresented the discussion that was going on here by substituting your own wishful thinking and by using out of context comments by people committed to making Mandrake successful. That is not being a good diplomat for the Debian Project. You took this thread where you wanted it to go, which was a far different place than when it started. - -- Greg -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+Ry7uwDpHP6GALAARAgNNAJ9tTqEtfmlOuVrwqg84wc1sb/wVnwCeJruH OQkFpW3PqORQEQJj+lA0Zxk= =2IEZ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Sun, 2003-02-09 at 22:47, Greg Meyer wrote: In my estimation, you have completely misrepresented the discussion that was going on here by substituting your own wishful thinking and by using out of context comments by people committed to making Mandrake successful. That is not being a good diplomat for the Debian Project. You took this thread where you wanted it to go, which was a far different place than when it started. You guys seem to have it ass backward. He was simply making suggestions, which were shot down. He wasn't trying to force anyone to do anything. They proposed to create Mandrake Linux development as community similar to how the Debian project is organised, which is why John Goerzen from Debian contributes to the discussion. Austin Acton wonders how Debian maintains responsibilities and resources. Sounds pretty harmless to me. The only thing in doubt is the reference to 'Mandrake developers', which makes it sound like Mandrakesoft employees were in this discussion, which they were not. -- Steve Fox http://k-lug.org
[Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mandrake as a new project inside Debian.But it was refused here, many feels involved.But if you change the original idea, try debian-project ML.The Debian-Mandrake can receive financial support of SPI as described by Goerzen, more and more developers, because Debian Developers Let me clarify a bit: I'm not saying that SPI would be able to donate money or resources to the Mandrake project (though that may be a possiblity). I'm saying that SPI may be able to receive donations on behalf of the Mandrake community, and hold any other assets such as servers or copyrights on their behalf, in much the same way as they do for Debian, the Berlin project, and others. It is just a way to make it easier to interface cyberspace with the real world. And it is a discussion totally separate from any Debian-Mandrake cooperation. -- John
[Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
Buchan Milne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In one months or two you're doing: apt-get update; apt-get -uy upgrade.I can see :P We have 'urpmi.update -a; urpmi --auto-select --auto' (I have this in cron), and it gives me more than Debain does, unless Debian has XFS+ACL This is an honest question, not a troll: can you explain to me in what exact ways the urpmi command is superior to the apt-get commands? Thanks, John
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Saturday 08 February 2003 12:34 pm, John Goerzen wrote: Buchan Milne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In one months or two you're doing: apt-get update; apt-get -uy upgrade.I can see :P We have 'urpmi.update -a; urpmi --auto-select --auto' (I have this in cron), and it gives me more than Debain does, unless Debian has XFS+ACL This is an honest question, not a troll: can you explain to me in what exact ways the urpmi command is superior to the apt-get commands? In my estimation, they are functionally equivalent. There may be some technical differences, but from my user perspective, they do the same thing. Although I like urpmi because it is fewer keystrokes ;-) -- /g
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Saturday 08 February 2003 18:34, John Goerzen wrote: Buchan Milne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In one months or two you're doing: apt-get update; apt-get -uy upgrade.I can see :P We have 'urpmi.update -a; urpmi --auto-select --auto' (I have this in cron), and it gives me more than Debain does, unless Debian has XFS+ACL This is an honest question, not a troll: can you explain to me in what exact ways the urpmi command is superior to the apt-get commands? Thanks, John It was not to show urpmi as superior, more that it can do the same and mandrake has features like xfs /ACLs , which debian has not. But if you want something, you may have a look at urpmi-parallel-* ;-) -- Regards Steffen counter.li.org : #296567. machine: 181800 vdr-box : 87 Please dont CC me, since if I have replied I'll watch the tread. Both mails will be filtered to the ML-folder. Thanks
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Sat, 2003-02-08 at 17:34, John Goerzen wrote: Buchan Milne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In one months or two you're doing: apt-get update; apt-get -uy upgrade.I can see :P We have 'urpmi.update -a; urpmi --auto-select --auto' (I have this in cron), and it gives me more than Debain does, unless Debian has XFS+ACL This is an honest question, not a troll: can you explain to me in what exact ways the urpmi command is superior to the apt-get commands? Don't think anyone said it was superior...they do the same basic job, I think in many ways there's more importance in the packaging and distribution philosophy, which maybe means Debian concentrate more on being able to update through apt than Mandrake does through urpmi. Let's face it - it's not actually a very difficult concept, the methodology is simple, it's the application of it that's important. -- adamw
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Sat, 2003-02-08 at 16:12, Steffen Barszus wrote: On Saturday 08 February 2003 18:34, John Goerzen wrote: Buchan Milne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In one months or two you're doing: apt-get update; apt-get -uy upgrade.I can see :P We have 'urpmi.update -a; urpmi --auto-select --auto' (I have this in cron), and it gives me more than Debain does, unless Debian has XFS+ACL This is an honest question, not a troll: can you explain to me in what exact ways the urpmi command is superior to the apt-get commands? It was not to show urpmi as superior, more that it can do the same and mandrake has features like xfs /ACLs , which debian has not. But if you want something, you may have a look at urpmi-parallel-* ;-) The latest Debian release, called Woody doesn't supports XFS officially, but you can use a solution[1] made by a developer.The reason is very simple: Stability first, features[2] after. If your choice is: Features first.Debian can solve your problems too, but you need do some job with your own hands, or use the unstable branch.It's more safe to all users. This subject isn't about Stability x Features and/or Debian x Mandrake, please don't damn me about your own way and your own choices. [1] = http://people.debian.org/~blade/XFS-Install/ [2] = http://oss.sgi.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=206 bye, -- Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The latest Debian release, called Woody doesn't supports XFS officially, but you can use a solution[1] made by a developer.The reason is very simple: Stability first, features[2] after. If your choice is: Features first.Debian can solve your problems too, but you need do some job with your own hands, or use the unstable branch.It's more safe to all users. that the whole difference of philisophy between Mdk-Lnx and Debian we trying to make the stuff easier by default without any tweaking. PS: Don't take wrong i like Debian if i wasn't a MandrakeSoft devel i would certainly use it..
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
John Goerzen wrote: Buchan Milne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In one months or two you're doing: apt-get update; apt-get -uy upgrade.I can see :P We have 'urpmi.update -a; urpmi --auto-select --auto' (I have this in cron), and it gives me more than Debain does, unless Debian has XFS+ACL This is an honest question, not a troll: can you explain to me in what exact ways the urpmi command is superior to the apt-get commands? Nothing really, besides the fact that perl-URPM or urpmi are used by many of the Mandrake tools to provide transparent software installation to the user when configuring services that need software installed, usuallly prompting the user with a question as to whether they want the software installed. urpmi is probably not as good as apt, but the sum of the parts (perl-URPM, rpmdrake, printerdrake, XFdrake, drakwizard etc) add up to alot of really useful tools. Buchan -- |--Another happy Mandrake Club member--| Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work+27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x121 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Sat, 2003-02-08 at 18:53, Buchan Milne wrote: John Goerzen wrote: Buchan Milne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In one months or two you're doing: apt-get update; apt-get -uy upgrade.I can see :P We have 'urpmi.update -a; urpmi --auto-select --auto' (I have this in cron), and it gives me more than Debain does, unless Debian has XFS+ACL This is an honest question, not a troll: can you explain to me in what exact ways the urpmi command is superior to the apt-get commands? Nothing really, besides the fact that perl-URPM or urpmi are used by many of the Mandrake tools to provide transparent software installation to the user when configuring services that need software installed, usuallly prompting the user with a question as to whether they want the software installed. urpmi is probably not as good as apt, but the sum of the parts (perl-URPM, rpmdrake, printerdrake, XFdrake, drakwizard etc) add up to alot of really useful tools. What's the discussion here? It isn't useful for us! I can expose some Debian tools that do the same as: libapt-pkg-perl, aptitude, gnome-apt, debconf(perl), cdebconf(The C *port* of debconf code being used in d-i, the new installer). And now, we can stop with this discussion about apt x urpmi ! Please, -- Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
You know, the best thing about Linux is that nobody forces you to use anything that you don't want to. In other words, not one person is forcing anybody to use or to contribute to Mandrake. If you feel that you are not getting what you need from Mandrake, then for heaven's sake please go find another distribution that can give you what you are looking for (TurboLinux, RedHat, gentoo, debian, etc., etc.). This thread started as an interesting conversation about how the Mandrake community could be made better, but now it's turned into debian is the best, it does everything Mandrake does only better, let's all do debian (especially from Gustavo). Fine. Go do debian and SHUT UP! Nobody is stopping you. Flame away. TTFN, Lonnie Borntreger
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's the discussion here? It isn't useful for us! please guys don't start a Debian vs Mdk-LNX threads it's completely useless and out of context...
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Sat, 2003-02-08 at 19:28, Lonnie Borntreger wrote: You know, the best thing about Linux is that nobody forces you to use anything that you don't want to. In other words, not one person is forcing anybody to use or to contribute to Mandrake. If you feel that you are not getting what you need from Mandrake, then for heaven's sake please go find another distribution that can give you what you are looking for (TurboLinux, RedHat, gentoo, debian, etc., etc.). Yes, i agree. This thread started as an interesting conversation about how the Mandrake community could be made better, but now it's turned into debian is the best, it does everything Mandrake does only better, let's all do debian (especially from Gustavo). Fine. Go do debian and SHUT UP! Nobody is stopping you. No, I and Goerzen are trying help some Mandrake enthusiasts to understand better the Debian Project internals.Yes, i did talk about a Debian-Mandrake, it was a suggestion ..is that nobody forces you to use anything that you don't want to..It was refused.Did you read the entire thread? I'm trying stop a parallel discussion about apt x urpmi, did you see? Finally, what's the thread that are you reading? Any person has the same view of my messages as Lonnie? Bye, -- Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Sat, 2003-02-08 at 19:28, Chmouel Boudjnah wrote: Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's the discussion here? It isn't useful for us! please guys don't start a Debian vs Mdk-LNX threads it's completely useless and out of context... Definitely, i agree.But some people are misunderstanding my posts. -- Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
Le Samedi 8 Février 2003 22:28, Chmouel Boudjnah a écrit : Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's the discussion here? It isn't useful for us! please guys don't start a Debian vs Mdk-LNX threads it's completely useless and out of context... Well, I think, for the good of all distributions, and all frees softwares, we should set up some mailling lists only for discussing these topics. ie, kde_vs_gnome, vim_vs_emacs, mandrake_vs_debian, rpm_vs_deb, etc etc etc. And, for windows users, we could set up a notepad_vs_wordpad list, of course. It would not requires so much space, since we don't need to have archives of the mail, since it is useless :-) Just imagine, if we can put some filter to change the mailling list when these topics are detected , with a manual intervention, or, with advanced troll detection system., everything will be so great ! Anybody mastering troll pattern recognition to help me on this ? -- Michaël Scherer
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
On Sat, 2003-02-08 at 19:51, Michael Scherer wrote: Le Samedi 8 Février 2003 22:28, Chmouel Boudjnah a écrit : Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's the discussion here? It isn't useful for us! please guys don't start a Debian vs Mdk-LNX threads it's completely useless and out of context... Well, I think, for the good of all distributions, and all frees softwares, we should set up some mailling lists only for discussing these topics. ie, kde_vs_gnome, vim_vs_emacs, mandrake_vs_debian, rpm_vs_deb, etc etc etc. And, for windows users, we could set up a notepad_vs_wordpad list, of course. It would not requires so much space, since we don't need to have archives of the mail, since it is useless :-) Just imagine, if we can put some filter to change the mailling list when these topics are detected , with a manual intervention, or, with advanced troll detection system., everything will be so great ! Anybody mastering troll pattern recognition to help me on this ? Obviously it was a troll! troll detected, adding X-Troll: yes to the headers! :P -- Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
Any person has the same view of my messages as Lonnie? ET, stands up waving both arms above head like a mad man who has been stuck on a desert island for years, upon seeing his rescue ship. Lonnie spoke for me too..
[Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
Before I reply to your message, Michael, let me briefly let people know why I'm involved :-) I've been a Debian developer since 1995 or so, and someone recently posted to our developer's list information about this thread, and I would like to try to offer a bit of insight on what Debian has done right, what Debian has done wrong, and perhaps explore some areas Debian can work together with the Mandrake community in the future. As a big disclaimer, I know little about the Mandrake community, its size, etc. So some comments may be based on wildly wrong assumptions :-) Michael Scherer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I dunno. How does debian do it? I beleive a maintainer per package. See: Well, we could try something like morethan one developper per package. Actually, in Debian, only the packager can change something. Debian's organization is laid out in a bottom-up fashion, and is described at http://www.debian.org/intro/organization. It is correct to say that each package has a primary maintainer. This is the person that is generally responsible for integration, fixing bugs, upgrading, etc. that particular package. We do have procedures for others to make changes, in the case of maintainer inactivity, urgent security matters, etc. We also have a lot of special-interest groups. Each Debian port has one. There are groups for translations into various languages, for special projects like Debian for kids and the desktop enhancement project, etc. For the most part, these groups work with maintainers, sending patches to the official maintainers for new features. Sometimes they develop new code from scratch or maintain packages as a group. The formal organization is based on the Debian Constitution, http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution. These procedures are not the sort of thing that Debian developers think about on a daily basis, but form the ways for us to appoint a Project Leader and certain other positions. The Leader does not have any direct authority over developers, but is more a organizational person to help move along committeess and advance new policies. We have had some growing pains as both the amount of software in Debian and the number of developers has grown significantly each year. Some things work well with a project having 300 developers but fail miserably when you hit 600. In particular, we have problems with developers that become nonresponsive for large periods of time, and we don't yet have good procedures to deal with that. I also like their package adoption system: http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/ Package adoption is great, but, to orphan a package is not really seen as a good thing by others developpers. Very true. Debian uses this for two purposes: 1. A developer is still maintaining a package, but wants to stop 2. A developer has stopped maintaining the package and wants to let others know about it. What about doing it the same way than Netbsd and FreeBSD. Debian is ported on a lot of processor, we can focus on a smaller subset. They have goals for each release in term of version of software, we can have more frequent releases, based on time. I'm not sure what the difference is here. Debian's release schedule is, according to everyone, too long. No quibbles there. It's nominally based on time, too.
[Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: PS: Some friends have always argued that the debian way is the only sustainable way to go. If mdk is going to do it just like debian, why not fold and move the idea's and effort into making debian a better distro instead of duplicating the effort? Sorry, but i've the same view! There are some interesting possibilities there, and I see Mandrake and Debian as being largely complimentary. That is, Mandrake's strengths are Debian's weaknesses, and vice-versa. As an example, Mandrake's installer is a lot nicer than Debian's, but Debian's package manager makes upgrades easier. There are both technical and on-technical issues. On the technical side, the most obvious is .deb vs. RPM. I can assure you that Debian is not going to switch, especially since most of us regard dpkg as being a superior tool. If this integration happens, it would likely have to do so within the dpkg framework. Debian is, however, a highly modular system. We have seen installers for Debian ported over from Caldera, among other places, as an example. Then there are non-technical questions. The main one I see is how Mandrake developers would find a place to do what they like within Debian. Since I know little about the Mandrake community, this is a tough one to speculate about. One possibility is forming a Debian-Mandrake project in Debian, along the lines of the Debian Desktop project. Or, joining the existing Desktop and installer projects. I imagine it could be frustrating for people used to doing the packaging themselves to have to deal with an already-established Debian maintainer for something. On the other hand, Debian doesn't have any code from Mandrake, so those would all come in as new packages. There is also the problem with Debian's new-maintainer system being slow. However, with enough support from the Debian side, that can be overcome reasonably well. -- John
[Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
Warly [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think Mandrake goal has always be very different from debian one. Mandrake is a distribution focused on user, aimed to ease linux access to everybody, and which is very reactive and on the cutting edge. Debian is more developper oriented and with a timeframe which is not compliant with basic users needs. I think this is a mischaracterization. Debian is also very user-oriented. It's just that Debian's users tend to have different needs than Mandrake's. Debian's snail-pace release schedule is not directly related to that, but is due to other factors that Debian has been working on fixing for some time. -- John
[Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
Austin Acton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: the lines of the Debian Desktop project. Or, joining the existing Desktop and installer projects. Are you serious? No, just opening Pandora's Box a little :-) Really, I'm just putting forth options, which may be really bad or may be really good. As I said, I know little about the Mandrake community or its goals, and I suspect you're in the same position wrt Debian, so I figured maybe we could learn a little from each other. -- John
Re: [Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
Le Vendredi 7 Février 2003 19:51, John Goerzen a écrit : I would like to try to offer a bit of insight on what Debian has done right, what Debian has done wrong, and perhaps explore some areas Debian can work together with the Mandrake community in the future. You 're welcome. I also like their package adoption system: http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/ Package adoption is great, but, to orphan a package is not really seen as a good thing by others developpers. Very true. Debian uses this for two purposes: 1. A developer is still maintaining a package, but wants to stop 2. A developer has stopped maintaining the package and wants to let others know about it. Well, orphaned package need to be adopted before any work is done on it, that's right ? If so, why not put them in a special zone, where people can submit some changes, without having the burden of maintening it ? What about doing it the same way than Netbsd and FreeBSD. Debian is ported on a lot of processor, we can focus on a smaller subset. They have goals for each release in term of version of software, we can have more frequent releases, based on time. I'm not sure what the difference is here. Debian's release schedule is, according to everyone, too long. No quibbles there. It's nominally based on time, too. Well, I tought it was in term of software. For Woody, it was perl 5.6, Xfree4.0 and kernel 2.4, or something similar, I think. So, no features freeze until these are out and tested a lot. But, it is possible I was wrong. -- Mickaël Scherer
[Cooker] Re: Creation of a community ( was : the end is inevitable )
Michael Scherer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 1. A developer is still maintaining a package, but wants to stop 2. A developer has stopped maintaining the package and wants to let others know about it. Well, orphaned package need to be adopted before any work is done on it, that's right ? Before significant work is done, yes. If so, why not put them in a special zone, where people can submit some changes, without having the burden of maintening it ? That's about what it amounts to, actually, though those changes are generally supposed to not be significant -- that is, bug fixes, etc. But you have an interesting idea that we might be able to use. Makes sense to go ahead and let orphaned packages have more effort. What generally happens is that if nobody steps up to maintain them, they will eventually become bug-ridden and uncompilable, and be removed from the distribution. That generally means that nobody cared enough about the package to maintain it, and so removing it is probably a good thing. I'm not sure what the difference is here. Debian's release schedule is, according to everyone, too long. No quibbles there. It's nominally based on time, too. Well, I tought it was in term of software. For Woody, it was perl 5.6, Xfree4.0 and kernel 2.4, or something similar, I think. That was true at one time, but it's not how it works now. We're taling now about when to freeze for the next release, and we're waiting for a serious bug in the latest glibc to work out. The way it is supposed to workq now is we set a timeframe for the next release, and then when that time arrives, the software that has shown up in unstable is put into testing and then we get it out the door. Sometimes we hold up the release to work out bugs in the packaging of major things like a new Perl, if we decide it's important enough to put into the new release. So, no features freeze until these are out and tested a lot. But, it is possible I was wrong. Actually, here's how it happens: 1. Developers build all their packages with unstable. 2. After a given package has been in unstable for x days without an open serious bug on it, it will be migrated to testing, but ONLY if all the packages it depends on are already in testing. This is an automated process. 3. Testers for the next stable release track testing, submitting bug reports where necessary. 4. When we decide to make a release, we restrict migration from stable to testing to be bugfixes only. 5. When there are no open release-critical bugs on testing, the release is made. -- John
