|--==> On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 22:42:47 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Tille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
AT> On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, Holger Levsen wrote: >>I'm getting a bit annoyed by your repeatatly stated attitude, that the name >>doesnt really matter, as long as its not CDD. Your main argument for this >>seems to be that any name can be misunderstood. AT> Not really. I just wanted to disprove the argumant that a name should AT> contain an explanation. In many cases it does not. It is fine for me AT> if this can be approached but this is not a general feature of a name. You're right, but I feel that if a project's name does not provide a precise definition of the project itself, than it should be _completely_ unrelated to it, and not provide an approximate definition. I think a good example of a project's name completely unrelated with the topic of the project is "Debian itself, which is a contraction of the names of Debra and Ian Murdock, who founded the project. [0] So if we want to go for a not-fully-explaining name, I would suggest to pick something of completely unrelated, maybe followed by "subtitle" like a one-line definition of the type Holger proposed. By the way I've talked about this topic with Daniel James (my partner at 64studio.com), and we both agreed that if we are seeking for a name easier to be marketed, and easier to understand for non-tech people, then we should probably avoid acronyms and a rather go for full expressions like Debian Pure Blend or Debian Remix (Daniel just added this last proposal the CDDNamingProposals wiki page). >>Even though I'd like to be constructive and suggest a better name now, I'm not >>sure if this is even a sensible approach. IMO we need to define the thing >>first, and then look for a name. Do we have such a definition written down >>somewhere? IMO this definition should also be short (while still complete), >>three paragraphs at maximum, better two, even better one. AT> Very good point! AT> As you might know I tried kind of that in Extremadura and some raw sketch AT> is at http://wiki.debian.org/CDDNamingProposals (Thingy 1) AT> # customises Debian for specific user needs which might be special working fields or language specifics AT> # adds some substructure to Debian (meta packages, specific debtags, etc.) which simplifies usage for the target user group AT> # has a special team of people working inside Debian and as an instance to contact upstream authors of relevant software AT> # does not use any extra pieces outside of the debian.org domain AT> Way shorter is http://wiki.debian.org/CustomDebian AT> a subset of Debian that is configured to support a particular target group out-of-the-box. AT> This is what we formerly used to describe what CDD means. I would be happy AT> if somebody with proper language skills could turn this into a real definition. I'm much interested in finding a short, possibly one-line, definition of the CDD concept. But before that (or in parallel with it) I think we should also try to write down a complete technical specification of what a CDD is (and here I mean strictly official and internal CDDs). I think that would help in finding a good name for the project as well. The best example that comes to my mind are the technical specifications of a Debian package, found in the Debian policy and in the dpkg documentation. These specifications define exactly what a Debian package is, like what the archive format of a .deb is or which fields must be present in debian/control. You can use the tool you want to create and build a debian package, cdbs, dh-make, debhelper, or even manually with ar and maybe a debian/rules written in plain C (in theory I think debian/rules is only required to be an exacutable supporting certain command line arguments like "binary" or "clean"). The only requirement for the Debian package is to be consistent with the specifications. In the same way there are several approaches, techniques tools to build a CDD, but still no common technical specification which precisely states what a CDD is supposed to be, so that at the end of the day it is not yet clear what we are talking about. Ciao, Free [0] http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-faq/ch-basic_defs.en.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]