On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 11:25:32AM -0300, Ben Armstrong wrote: > On 07/07/2011 10:59 AM, Ben Armstrong wrote: > > To fix, change the heading from "Difference between a Blend and a > > derivative" to "Difference between a Blend and a remaster", or else > > rework the content to clearly make the distinction. > > Oh, and if you decide to rework the content, the tone needs adjustment.
Sorry for mixing this up - I was a bit quick yesterday when doing this under time pressure. So yes, the arguing was not about derivatives and I decided for fixing the heading and adding a short introduction paragraph. I hope this makes things more clear. > I am fairly critical of what I call "vanity" distributions that are poor > quality rip-offs of some parent distro. These invariably end up shafting > the user when the creator gets bored or overwhelmed and stops providing > support. On the other hand, I have respect for derivative distributions > which fork from a parent distro due to differences that cannot be > reconciled in any other way. These derivatives most often have their own > archives, bug tracking system, mailing lists/forums and so forth, and > when done well, illustrate the strength with free software of being able > to fork. I definitely would not want to come off in our documentation as > being "anti-derivatives", particularly in light of recent efforts to > develop a better relationship between Debian and derivatives through the > Debian Derivatives Exchange project > (http://www.debian.org/News/2011/20110318). Sure. In this sense another subsection should be added to the docs but this needs more careful thinking than I can currently spend time into it. BTW, feel free to provide patches to the doc in SVN - it should be writable for any DD. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
