Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Reintroducing FFmpeg to Debian

[Thomas Weber]

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:53:41AM +0100, Kieran Kunhya wrote:
> > Also ive offered my resignation in the past.
> > I do still offer to resign from the FFmpeg leader position, if it
> > resolves this split between FFmpeg and Libav and make everyone work
> > together again. I never understood why people who once where friends
> > became mutually so hostile
> 
> The big elephant in the room in any discussion about even moving an
> iota in the direction of something resembling a resolution is that you
> as FFmpeg leader are a hidden leader. Every year at VDD when there is
> any informal discussion of any reconciliation as Attila alludes to the
> line "we can't get anywhere since Michael isn't here" is uttered and
> then everyone moves on.

Guys, 
this is getting nowhere. You need to solve this in a non-public
discussion. 
Given the amount of noise this has generated on debian-devel, I am sure
some of the Debian oldtimers[1] will be happy[2] to act as mediators for
such a discussion if it is organized in a somewhat convenient
location/conference/etc and if both sides consider such a mediation
helpful.

[1] With or without previous contacts with ffmpeg/libav.
[2] Think of it like "spending some hours to fix the issue" vs "spending
some hours to read more mails on debian-devel".

Thomas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140814065750.GA30581@t61

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Christian PERRIER]

Quoting Josselin Mouette (j...@debian.org):

> I’d like the thread to be useful, and for that goal it would be much
> appreciated if the d-i team could you tell us what the relevant criteria
> are and what people need to work on.

Here is my opinion. Please take it as "opinion of someone who's been
involved in D-I for 10 years and pretends having a rough idea of the
D-I goals". So, indeed, not much more than the personal opinion of an
old chap...

> 
> → Is the installation CD size still relevant?

IMHO, no. I've seen most of the arguments about bandwidth in so-called
"3rd world", use on old hardware, blah, blah blah and I'm not convinced
at all.

> → What is the target audience of Debian-installer for the default
> image?

Average users with little or no experience of Linux but still, in some
way, technically skilled. In the past, with Joeyh, we were calling
these "Bob users" instead of "Joe users"

> → What is the required level of accessibility?

A high as possible. A11y has always been a priority for the D-I team,
assuming we have the manpower and skills for it (thankfully, Samuel
helps a lot in that for years).


> → Will you configure different defaults for different architectures?


Given the current architecture of tasksel, I think it requires
important changes to the code and nearly nobody contributes to the
code: tasksel is in maintenance only mode with easy to fix bugs being
fixed as well as bugs or fixes required to cope with changes in
installed packages.

FWIW, my current personal opinion would be "revert back to GNOME as
default".




signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Roger Lynn]

On 07/08/14 23:10, Jordi Mallach wrote:
> Popularity: One of the metrics discussed by the tasksel change proponents
> mentioned popcon numbers. 8 months after the desktop change, Xfce does not 
> seem
> to have made a dent on install numbers.  The Debian GNOME team doesn’t feel
> popcon’s data is any better than a random online poll though, as it’s an 
> opt-in
> service which the vast majority of users don’t enable.

What proportion of people installing testing or unstable will just go along
with the default? Won't most people choosing the default options be using
the stable installer? It would therefore be difficult to collect any
meaningful data at all from popcon until there was stable release with
changed defaults.

Roger


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/608tbb-4km@silverstone.rilynn.me.uk

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Anthony F McInerney]

>
>
> I’d like the thread to be useful, and for that goal it would be much
> appreciated if the d-i team could you tell us what the relevant criteria
> are and what people need to work on.
>
> → Is the installation CD size still relevant?
> → What is the target audience of Debian-installer for the default image?
> → What is the required level of accessibility?
> → Will you configure different defaults for different architectures?
>

I concur with this message, i also ask that whatever DE is chosen that they
are open to change of default packages, default settings and default
recommends. So that the debian default is a reflection not of that DE but
of debian actually doing something proactive with it.
I'd also like to note that HiDPI appears (as per my message which was not
commented on) appears to be completely irrelevant as no current solution in
debian appears to support it fully.

On 14 August 2014 00:32, Simon McVittie  wrote:

>but they can at least be good for people who
>don't know which they prefer, because those people are reliant on the
>default.

Which i believe concurs with my statement above.

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Theodore Ts'o]

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 06:34:46PM -0400, Hashem Nasarat wrote:
> 
> The following "first party" extensions are developed along with
> gnome-shell and are updated for each gnome-shell release.
> https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-shell-extensions/tree/extensions
> 
> Extensions on https://extensions.gnome.org/ are the ones that are often
> late with updating based on new releases.

I note that the workspace grid extension (which seems to be the only
way you can get a 2-dimensional workspace) is not a "first party"
extension.  So if you depend on it, you are more at risk than usual if
you use GNOME

- Ted


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140813234404.gd28...@thunk.org

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Simon McVittie]

On 13/08/14 23:08, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
> the common reaction I get from new Linux users [...]
> I would also recommend to go for
> this user group when selecting a default, since any more experienced
> user can absolutely be expected to pick the right image with their
> favourite flavour of Debian, or change some options in the installer.
> Unexperienced users usually don't really know what they want, so
> selecting a good default for them would be useful.

Yes, this. Debian's defaults are never going to please everyone, because
you can't default to GNOME, KDE, XFCE, LXDE, fvwm, awesome, ratpoison
etc. all at the same time; but they can at least be good for people who
don't know which they prefer, because those people are reliant on the
default.

S


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53ebf59c.5080...@debian.org

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Josselin Mouette]

Le mardi 12 août 2014 à 12:26 -0400, Joey Hess a écrit : 
> Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Do you intend to review (or are you reviewing) the decision taken in
> > July 2012 [1] ?  If so, is this discussion here on -devel useful ?  If
> > it is useful, what questions should we be focusing on ?
> 
> See my 1st message to this thread.
> 
> Can't say I've found most of the thread useful.

I’d like the thread to be useful, and for that goal it would be much
appreciated if the d-i team could you tell us what the relevant criteria
are and what people need to work on.

→ Is the installation CD size still relevant?
→ What is the target audience of Debian-installer for the default image?
→ What is the required level of accessibility?
→ Will you configure different defaults for different architectures?

Thanks for your input.
-- 
 .''`.  Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `'
  `-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1407972375.4321.3.camel@tomoyo

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Hashem Nasarat]

On 08/13/2014 06:08 PM, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
> 2014-08-13 22:59 GMT+02:00 Theodore Ts'o :
>> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:18:49PM +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
>>> Well, Linus' extensions won't break because GNOME updates them with
>>> every release and ships them with the official GNOME release.
>>
>> From the README found in "gnome-shell-extensions" sources:
>>
>> GNOME Shell Extensions is a collection of extensions providing additional
>> and optional functionality to GNOME Shell.
>> Since GNOME Shell is not API stable, extensions work only against a very
>> specific version of the shell, usually the same as this package (see
>> "configure --version"). Also, since extensions are built from many
>> individual contributors, we cannot guarantee stability or quality for any
>> specific extension.
>> For these reasons, distributions are advised to avoid installing or 
>> packaging
>> this module by default.
> That's odd - I remember someone from the GNOME folks saying that they
> develop these extensions together with the Shell and as part of
> official GNOME so they do not break and users can rely on them.
> Also, they provide the stuff needed for GNOME Classic, which is the
> default desktop on RHEL (so I kind of expect that stuff to work and to
> be developed in future).
> But that README file is indeed very clear about the extensions repo...
> 

The following "first party" extensions are developed along with
gnome-shell and are updated for each gnome-shell release.
https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-shell-extensions/tree/extensions

Extensions on https://extensions.gnome.org/ are the ones that are often
late with updating based on new releases.

(My perspective as a Debian user: I cannot bring myself to recommend
Debian to GNU/Linux newcomers, and those not interested in tinkering
with packages and DEs, if the default DE isn't comparable (in terms of
usability, features, design) to GNOME.  If this is the case, I will
sadly recommend Mint, Fedora, or some Ubuntu flavor instead, which all
have demonstrated more of a focus to those not in the ivory tower).


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53ebe806.6040...@gmail.com

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Matthias Klumpp]

2014-08-13 22:59 GMT+02:00 Theodore Ts'o :
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:18:49PM +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
>> Well, Linus' extensions won't break because GNOME updates them with
>> every release and ships them with the official GNOME release.
>
> From the README found in "gnome-shell-extensions" sources:
>
> GNOME Shell Extensions is a collection of extensions providing additional
> and optional functionality to GNOME Shell.
> Since GNOME Shell is not API stable, extensions work only against a very
> specific version of the shell, usually the same as this package (see
> "configure --version"). Also, since extensions are built from many
> individual contributors, we cannot guarantee stability or quality for any
> specific extension.
> For these reasons, distributions are advised to avoid installing or 
> packaging
> this module by default.
That's odd - I remember someone from the GNOME folks saying that they
develop these extensions together with the Shell and as part of
official GNOME so they do not break and users can rely on them.
Also, they provide the stuff needed for GNOME Classic, which is the
default desktop on RHEL (so I kind of expect that stuff to work and to
be developed in future).
But that README file is indeed very clear about the extensions repo...

> So again, it'll be interesting to see how many extensions work when
> 3.14 gets released, and how many just break or just silently
> disappear
>
> Of course, not anything which is officially in GNOME is guaranteed to
> stick around, either.  Functionality which is part of "official" GNOME
> have commonly disappeared in a version "upgrade" as well, and the
> Gnome Shell Extensions has a lesser guarantee of stability than
> features in core GNOME.
>
> At least for me, it's a case of "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me
> twice, shame on me."
That's why I use KDE (GNOME also has some small annoyances like having
to delete things in Nautilus using ALT+ENTF etc.) - but admittedly,
the GNOME experience is very usable, and the common reaction I get
from new Linux users is some kind of "wow" effect, since they like the
clean and modern design of GNOME as well as it's workflow, which lets
people focus on screen content instead of desktop chrome.
So if that's the people we want to reach with the default desktop,
GNOME is certainly a good option. I would also recommend to go for
this user group when selecting a default, since any more experienced
user can absolutely be expected to pick the right image with their
favourite flavour of Debian, or change some options in the installer.
Unexperienced users usually don't really know what they want, so
selecting a good default for them would be useful.
People for computers with low specs could pick an image with Xfce or
LXQt and experience a great desktop environment - since there isn't
really a "second class" desktop in Debian, only different levels of
how well something is maintained.
Cheers,
Matthias

P.S: Of course, KDE Plasma would also be a great choice as DE
default-selection ;-)

-- 
Debian Developer | Freedesktop-Developer
I welcome VSRE emails. See http://vsre.info/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/caknhny8nek6aw3zeyrxzrbvmvfsb4apherxm1vsgc5tpacs...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Bugs which do not belong to console-setup

[Tomas Pospisek]

Am 07.08.2014 12:32, schrieb Anton Zinoviev:

> I have two bugs reported against console-setup about keybord not working 
> properly under X Window.  In both cases I have asked the reportes to 
> provide the file /etc/default/keyboard and in both cases the file was 
> correct.  Therefore, the bugs are not related to console-setup in any 
> way.
> 
> Unfortunately X Window and the various desktop environments are 
> something I don't understand well enough, so I have no idea where to 
> reassign these bugs.  In result, at the moment both bugs are completely 
> ignored.
> 
> Please advise what should I do in such cases.
> 
> The bugs are: 
> #709883 - reported 14 months ago and #724869 - reported 10 months ago.

Wrt. #709883 the original bug reporter (OBR) wrote:

> [...]
> I tried with gdm3/ligthdm/only startx, and the problems is still
> here. It seems related to X or udev since the upgrade, because gnome
> is well set and gives a french keyboard (macbook pro one), and for
> awesome, my main wm, i have to setxkbmap fr in ~/.xsession to get a
> french keyboard layout
> [...]
> I'm still trying to figure out how to get french back at dm greeter

So most window managers and login managers don't get the keyboard right,
however gnome does.

The correct/wrong keyboard setup/information must come from *somewhere*,
but from where?

So one thing the OBR could do to figure out what's going on is to
"strace -f" startx and the gnome startup, figure out which files are
being accessed (only stat, open and mmap calls are of interest I guess)
and then compare the produced lists.

Otherwise, if nobody can figure out what's going on, or the OBR doesn't
care any more either the OBR or the console-setup maintainers can decide
to close the bug, since no way forward can be made unless there's more
info. Or leave it open.

HTH a bit,
*t


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53ebd7b4.8050...@sourcepole.ch

Re: First steps towards source-only uploads

[Philipp Kern]

On 2014-08-13 14:34, Raphael Hertzog wrote:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2014, Colin Watson wrote:

I don't think there's a good reason to build them separately, and some
good reasons not to (for example, it would waste a good deal of buildd
time for a number of packages without very hygienic separation of 
their
build rules).  My suggestion would be to just build them along with 
the

architecture-dependent binaries for some nominated architecture, which
could be package-specific or not depending on what you all have time
for, and be done with it.

+1

In kali, that's exactly what I have been doing. Any package that builds
an arch: all is sent to an amd64 buildd and sbuild on the amd64 buildd 
gets

called with -A.

It doesn't matter whether it builds only the arch: all or another 
package

too.


We need to convey if the arch:all is actually needed, though, otherwise 
dak will reject the package. Or could we simply build it always and have 
it discarded if the maintainer's copy had been accepted?


Kind regards
Philipp Kern


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/99bea068419b09ad368191a1cd596...@hub.kern.lc

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Theodore Ts'o]

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:18:49PM +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
> Well, Linus' extensions won't break because GNOME updates them with
> every release and ships them with the official GNOME release.

>From the README found in "gnome-shell-extensions" sources:

GNOME Shell Extensions is a collection of extensions providing additional
and optional functionality to GNOME Shell.
Since GNOME Shell is not API stable, extensions work only against a very
specific version of the shell, usually the same as this package (see
"configure --version"). Also, since extensions are built from many
individual contributors, we cannot guarantee stability or quality for any
specific extension.
For these reasons, distributions are advised to avoid installing or 
packaging
this module by default.

So again, it'll be interesting to see how many extensions work when
3.14 gets released, and how many just break or just silently
disappear

Of course, not anything which is officially in GNOME is guaranteed to
stick around, either.  Functionality which is part of "official" GNOME
have commonly disappeared in a version "upgrade" as well, and the
Gnome Shell Extensions has a lesser guarantee of stability than
features in core GNOME.

At least for me, it's a case of "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me
twice, shame on me."

- Ted


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140813205924.gc28...@thunk.org

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Matthias Klumpp]

2014-08-13 22:05 GMT+02:00 Anthony F McInerney :
>> But I'm actually back to gnome3 because with the right
>>  extensions it is more pleasant."
>
> So the question is does debian have the extensions he speaks of?
> (and) Have debian tweaked those extensions by default, to his liking?
>
> And to quote a not so famous computer user who said "what's that crap on the
> screen, i don't like that, why have they made it look like android"(main
> gnome3 menu + app list) and "i can't login to your laptop now". (GDM3)
> I asked for no opinion or expressed one either way. But since we're now just
> quoting things people said.
> The user has far more experience with windows in general, but has no
> problems with lightdm+ e17. (never seen xfce)
> Again i suppose it depends who debian is targetting by default.
Well, Linus' extensions won't break because GNOME updates them with
every release and ships them with the official GNOME release.
They are also available in Debian:
https://packages.debian.org/sid/gnome-shell-extensions
In order to use a "classic" GNOME, the only thing the user has to do
on a Debian installation is (if the extensions package is installed)
to select "GNOME Classic" from the login screen.
So it's not complicated at all.
Cheers,
Matthias

-- 
Debian Developer | Freedesktop-Developer
I welcome VSRE emails. See http://vsre.info/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/caknhny_p64kxeppqaqu5nmtbq3eogzzoxsuqzocp8hhgxsu...@mail.gmail.com

Re: First steps towards source-only uploads

[Guillem Jover]

On Wed, 2014-08-13 at 12:24:49 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Guillem Jover wrote:
> >   # Full build, but filter the generated .changes file to only inlcude
> >   # source and possibly arch-indep binaries, will not fail if the
> >   # latter are missing.
> >   $ dpkg-buildpackage --changes-option=-g
> > 
> > The advantage of the second is that the package is fully built so that
> > the maintainer can test that it builds and can install and test the
> > resulting packages. Unfortunately as arch-specific packages are filtered
> > out from the .changes file, lintian will not be able to find them. So you
> > migth want to do a normal build followed by one with either -S or -g.
> 
> I tend to use "debuild" from devscripts, primarily because it
> automatically runs lintian.  If dpkg-buildpackage gained native support
> for invoking lintian, it could do so on the unfiltered changes file, and
> then emit the filtered changes file.  Would you consider including
> support for that in dpkg-buildpackage?

dpkg-buildpackage does support running a checker like lintian since
1.17.6 (see --check-command and DEB_CHECK_COMMAND in the man page).
Doing what you request would require running dpkg-genchanges twice,
but only sometimes, I'm not sure I like how that would smell as an
interface, but I'll ponder about it (maybe just adding an option to
request the filtering, so that the build type option is passed to
dpkg-genchanges for the final .changes file, but otherwise
dpkg-buildpackage performs a normal full build, hmmm).

What comes to mind though, although slightly cumbersome, is that right
now there's also this other option, which should cover all requirements
(except being succint :):

  $ export DEB_CHECK_COMMAND=lintian

  $ dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc
  $ dpkg-genchanges -g >../pkgname_version_src+all.changes
  $ debsign ../pkgname_version_src+all.changes

(dpkg-genchanges really needs a -O[filename] option, which I'll be
implementing soon, and signing should eventually be disabled by
default anyway as discussed some time ago here.)

Thanks,
Guillem


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140813201603.ga11...@gaara.hadrons.org

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Anthony F McInerney]

>
> But I'm actually back to gnome3 because with the right
>  extensions it is more pleasant."
>
So the question is does debian have the extensions he speaks of?
(and) Have debian tweaked those extensions by default, to his liking?

And to quote a not so famous computer user who said "what's that crap on
the screen, i don't like that, why have they made it look like
android"(main gnome3 menu + app list) and "i can't login to your laptop
now". (GDM3)
I asked for no opinion or expressed one either way. But since we're now
just quoting things people said.
The user has far more experience with windows in general, but has no
problems with lightdm+ e17. (never seen xfce)
Again i suppose it depends who debian is targetting by default.

Bug#758053: ITP: ruby-exception-notification -- exception notification support for Rails and Rack apps

[Antonio Terceiro]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Antonio Terceiro 

* Package name: ruby-exception-notification
  Version : 4.0.1
  Upstream Author : Jamis Buck
* URL : https://github.com/smartinez87/exception_notification
* License : MIT (Expat)
  Programming Lang: Ruby
  Description : exception notification support for Rails and Rack apps

Using this package, Rails or Rack applications can be configured can be
configured to notify a designated email address about any unhandled
exceptions raised by the application.

-- 
Antonio Terceiro 


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Theodore Ts'o]

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 04:09:25PM +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> To quote a fairly famous Linux user who eventually came back from XFCE
> to GNOME: "But I'm actually back to gnome3 because with the right
> extensions it is more pleasant."[1]
> 
> But I'm not sure if he qualifies as a power user or is just another guy
> who like Windows 8 or OS X. *scnr*

I wait with bated breath when the next GNOME version update breaks all
of his extensions (as GNOME version updates are wont to do).  And then
when he complains, hopefully he won't swear too much, when he's told
that it's his fault for depending on GNOME extensions, since there is
zero guarantees of compatibility given by GNOME.

(This is Linus "thou shalt not break userspace" Torvalds we're talking
about.  And the GNOME extensions are the diametric opposite of that
philosophy.)

- Ted


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140813194109.gb28...@thunk.org

Re: First steps towards source-only uploads

[Josh Triplett]

Guillem Jover wrote:
>   # Full build, but filter the generated .changes file to only inlcude
>   # source and possibly arch-indep binaries, will not fail if the
>   # latter are missing.
>   $ dpkg-buildpackage --changes-option=-g
> 
> The advantage of the second is that the package is fully built so that
> the maintainer can test that it builds and can install and test the
> resulting packages. Unfortunately as arch-specific packages are filtered
> out from the .changes file, lintian will not be able to find them. So you
> migth want to do a normal build followed by one with either -S or -g.

I tend to use "debuild" from devscripts, primarily because it
automatically runs lintian.  If dpkg-buildpackage gained native support
for invoking lintian, it could do so on the unfiltered changes file, and
then emit the filtered changes file.  Would you consider including
support for that in dpkg-buildpackage?

- Josh Triplett


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140813192409.GA3056@jtriplet-mobl1

Bug#758041: ITP: python-xstatic-hogan -- Hogan.js XStatic support

[Thomas Goirand]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Thomas Goirand 

* Package name: python-xstatic-hogan
  Version : 2.0.0.2
  Upstream Author : Radomir Dopieralski 
* URL : https://github.com/stackforge/xstatic-hogan
* License : Apache-2.0
  Programming Lang: Python, JS
  Description : Hogan.js XStatic support

 XStatic is a packaging standard to package external (often 3rd party) static
 files as a Python package, so they are easily usable on all operating systems,
 with any package management system or even without one.
 .
 Many Python projects need to use some specific data files, like javascript,
 css, java applets, images, etc. Sometimes these files belong to YOUR project
 (then you may want to package them separately, but you could also just put
 them into your main package). But in many other cases, those files are
 maintained by someone else (like jQuery javascript library or even much bigger
 js libraries or applications) and you definitely do not really want to merge
 them into your project. So, you want to have static file packages, but you
 don’t want to get lots of stuff you do not want. Thus, stuff required by
 XStatic file packages (especially the main, toplevel XStatic package) tries to
 obey to be a MINIMAL, no-fat thing. XStatic doesn't "sell" any web framework
 or other stuff you don't want. Maybe there will be optional XStatic extensions
 for all sorts of stuff, but they won't be required if you just want the files.
 .
 By having static files in packages, it is also easier to build virtual envs,
 support linux/bsd/... distribution package maintainers and even windows
 installs using the same mechanism.
 .
 This package provides Hogan.js support as a Python module.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/20140813163749.28566.33035.report...@buzig.gplhost.com

Re: 2 months and no upload for pkg

[Amir Taaki]

It has now appeared in the repos! Thanks everyone.

https://packages.qa.debian.org/libb/libbitcoin.html


On 13/08/14 09:20, Charles Plessy wrote:
>> Quoting Amir Taaki (gen...@riseup.net):
>>
>>> However, I think maybe this might have slipped through the cracks and
>>> has been missed. Any information would be much appreciated.
>>> The responsible team (Debian Bitcoin Team) seems to be dead judging from
>>> their mailing list.
> 
> Le Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 08:57:09AM +0200, Christian PERRIER a écrit :
>>
>> There is not much you can do, indeed, except patiently waiting. I had
>> to wait for such a long time for a package of mine (openambit) to
>> enter the archive, recently. But, given that I can't really offer the
>> FTPmaster team what they need the most (help), my only option isto
>> be patient
> 
> Hello Amir and everybody,
> 
> there is one thing that we can do: increase the quality of the packages that 
> we
> submit to the NEW queue.  Acording to one member of the FTP Master team, up to
> 80 % of the packages have a problem [0].  Indeed, when I and others have
> checked packages in the queue, it was not too hard to find imprecisions or
> omissions in the debian/copyright file.
> 
> Peer review can help, by making sure that the final controllers (the FTP 
> Master
> team) do not waste their time reporting defects that others could have found.
> 
> You can find a process for peer review at the URL below.
> 
> https://wiki.debian.org/CopyrightReview
> 
> Have a nice day,
> 
> [0] 
> https://lists.debian.org/alpine.deb.2.02.1408060907090.9...@jupiter.server.alteholz.net
> 



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Reintroducing FFmpeg to Debian

[Attila Kinali]

On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 00:30:05 +0200
Michael Niedermayer  wrote:

> I never understood why people who once where friends
> became mutually so hostile

You should know that better than anyone else!

You still claim to be my friend, yet you said and did things
that i have not seen from my enemies, let alone from my friends.
To this day, after 3 years, i still get accused by random people
of thing i supposedly have done against FFmpeg and the spirit
of open source. After 3 years i still have to defend myself against
these baseless attacks! 

If you trully want to mend ways, then you and your fellow FFmpeg
developers should stop this constant spreading of lies, this
defamation campaing against libav and its developers that has
been going on for the last 3 and a half years and show at least
the minimum respect you would show to a stranger you meet on the
street. Until you do this, i see very little chance for a healthy
cooperation.

That said, i invite all FFmpeg developers to come to VDD next month
and sit together with everyone. So that we can have a healthy discussion
once again. Drink beer, hot chocolate and have fun together.


Attila Kinali

-- 
It is upon moral qualities that a society is ultimately founded. All 
the prosperity and technological sophistication in the world is of no 
use without that foundation.
 -- Miss Matheson, The Diamond Age, Neil Stephenson


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/20140813162720.79a96a770f4ed5dca7ea0...@kinali.ch

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Ansgar Burchardt]

Hi,

On 08/13/2014 15:43, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> Is it the power user?  Is it developers?  Is it the typical users I've
> seen on Launchpad, such that I've largely stopped dealing with bug
> reports there --- far too many Ubuntu users can't file a proper bug
> report, and then other Ubuntu users Google their symptoms, and drop in
> irrelevant observation for problems that superficially have the same
> symptoms, but are about something else entirely?
> 
> If you want Debian to target people who like Windows 8, or maybe Mac
> OS, then GNOME or Unity is the right default DE.  If you don't care
> about servicing the needs of your current user base, and instead want
> to chase after (hopefully) potentially new users, the way the GNOME
> project has done, by all means, go with GNOME.

To quote a fairly famous Linux user who eventually came back from XFCE
to GNOME: "But I'm actually back to gnome3 because with the right
extensions it is more pleasant."[1]

But I'm not sure if he qualifies as a power user or is just another guy
who like Windows 8 or OS X. *scnr*

Ansgar

  [1] One of the comments to the post
  https://plus.google.com/115250422803614415116/posts/KygiWsQc4Wm


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53eb7195.2080...@debian.org

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Axel Wagner]

Hi,

Theodore Ts'o  writes:
> This is actually the core (hidden) question which I think is driving
> the whole debate.  Ignoring the claims of Debian as the "universal
> operating system", what audience does Debian what to target by default
> in its installer?

Agreed. Though "default" is a very important word here, that you seem to
have omitted in the rest of the mail. You don't have to give up
targeting devs and similar, to try to get new users by having
noob-friendly defaults.

Best,

Axel Wagner


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/878umsiiz7.fsf@rincewind.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me

A proposition for you..

[Kevin Baker]

Hello there,

Basically I’m emailing today to see if you offer any advertising options on
your site. I’m working with a Web Hosting company and I think advertising
or a sponsored post on your site would be really beneficial to them.

I have thought of a few ideas if you do offer sponsored post options, but
if there is anything you want covered just let me know:

1) Ways In Which the Right Web Hosting Provider Can Improve Your Online
Business
2) Commonly Asked Questions About Free Web Hosting
3) Dedicated Hosting Or Shared Hosting: Which One's Better?
4) Questions You should Ask Your Web Hosting Provider
5) Finding the Right Web Host for an E-Commerce Website
6) How To Safeguard Your Dedicated Server
7) Web Hosting 101: Things to Avoid in web Hosting
8) Tips on Using VPS Hosting Effectively
9) Understanding How Reseller Web Hosting Works
10) How Affiliate Marketing Can Help Your Web Hosting Business
If you are interested or have any questions then don’t hesitate to get in
touch and let me know what you offer.

What do you think?

Thanks!

Kevin

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Theodore Ts'o]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 05:17:10PM -0700, Octavio Alvarez wrote:
> 
> That's why I see GNOME 3 as a tablet environment. I'd love to use a
> tablet with GNOME 3. But using it in a desktop just reduces the
> communication between me and my computer. What is Debian?

This is actually the core (hidden) question which I think is driving
the whole debate.  Ignoring the claims of Debian as the "universal
operating system", what audience does Debian what to target by default
in its installer?

Is it the power user?  Is it developers?  Is it the typical users I've
seen on Launchpad, such that I've largely stopped dealing with bug
reports there --- far too many Ubuntu users can't file a proper bug
report, and then other Ubuntu users Google their symptoms, and drop in
irrelevant observation for problems that superficially have the same
symptoms, but are about something else entirely?

If you want Debian to target people who like Windows 8, or maybe Mac
OS, then GNOME or Unity is the right default DE.  If you don't care
about servicing the needs of your current user base, and instead want
to chase after (hopefully) potentially new users, the way the GNOME
project has done, by all means, go with GNOME.

I have a slight bias towards XFCE, but honestly, it's for primarily
selfish reasons --- I don't want the sort of bug reports that
Launchpad gets; the vast majority of bugs filed with the BTS are by
people with whom I can work with to fix bugs, and as a result packages
such as e2sprogs get better for everyone.  And so very selfishly, I
don't want that signal to get drowned out by the noise which is
Launchpad, and so I'd prefer that Ubuntu continue to target the
Windows 8 and Mac OS user market.

It may be that Debian would like to go after the same thing.  If so,
I'll be sad, but given that I can always install some other DE, at the
end of the day it doesn't make that much difference to my personal
workflow, since I can always override the default.

Cheers,

- Ted


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140813134330.ga28...@thunk.org

Re: JIFFIES in userspace

[Tomas Pospisek]

Tach Joël,

Am 13.08.2014 05:42, schrieb Joël Krähemann:
> Hi I develop an audio sequencer:
> http://ags.sf.net
> 
> Now, what values would you recommend as JIFFIEs for the following
> threads:
> 
> * AgsAudioLoop
> * AgsTaskThread
> * AgsGuiThread
> * AgsDevoutThread

the topic of the debian-devel mailing list is the development of the
Debian Linux distribution. It's not about application or more
specifically sound application development. You might want to search the
internet for more specific mailing lists, that concern themselves with
audio on Linux. They should be more qualified to help you.

Greets,
*t


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53eb5ec0.8020...@sourcepole.ch

Re: First steps towards source-only uploads

[Raphael Hertzog]

Hi,

On Tue, 12 Aug 2014, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> First, w-b has to recognize that arch:all packages need to be built.
> And they need to be scheduled on a buildd which builds the arch:all
> packages (and only the arch:all packages?).
> 
> For the latter I assume sbuild would need an option to build only the
> arch:all packages using dpkg-buildpackage -A. It would also be
> interesting to test which packages FTBFS in this case.

FWIW, sbuild supports "-A" (--arch-all) and this will result in calling
dpkg-buildpackage -b (instead of -B). 

On Wed, 13 Aug 2014, Colin Watson wrote:
> I don't think there's a good reason to build them separately, and some
> good reasons not to (for example, it would waste a good deal of buildd
> time for a number of packages without very hygienic separation of their
> build rules).  My suggestion would be to just build them along with the
> architecture-dependent binaries for some nominated architecture, which
> could be package-specific or not depending on what you all have time
> for, and be done with it.

+1

In kali, that's exactly what I have been doing. Any package that builds
an arch: all is sent to an amd64 buildd and sbuild on the amd64 buildd gets
called with -A.

It doesn't matter whether it builds only the arch: all or another package
too.

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer

Discover the Debian Administrator's Handbook:
→ http://debian-handbook.info/get/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140813123433.gb6...@x230-buxy.home.ouaza.com

Re: First steps towards source-only uploads

[Guillem Jover]

Hi!

On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 02:35:46 -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> #756975 dpkg-dev: dpkg-genchanges option to only include arch:all debs

This is now available in dpkg 1.17.11, and as mentioned on the bug
report, you can use it in at least these ways:

  # Source and arch-indep only build, will fail if the package does
  # not produce any arch-indep binary, in which case you'd use -S.
  $ dpkg-buildpackage -g

or

  # Full build, but filter the generated .changes file to only inlcude
  # source and possibly arch-indep binaries, will not fail if the
  # latter are missing.
  $ dpkg-buildpackage --changes-option=-g

The advantage of the second is that the package is fully built so that
the maintainer can test that it builds and can install and test the
resulting packages. Unfortunately as arch-specific packages are filtered
out from the .changes file, lintian will not be able to find them. So you
migth want to do a normal build followed by one with either -S or -g.

Thanks,
Guillem


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140813120220.gb13...@gaara.hadrons.org

Re: First steps towards source-only uploads

[Guillem Jover]

Hi!

[ I had a note to reply to the previous thread, but never got to it. ]

On Tue, 2014-08-12 at 13:27:38 +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> On 08/12/2014 12:33, Hector Oron wrote:
> > 2014-08-01 9:37 GMT+02:00 Ansgar Burchardt :
> >> We will allow not including arch:all packages in uploads once we have
> >> sorted out how to get them built.
> > 
> > Has it  been already discussed? If so, where?

> There are also other problems that need to be eventually addressed: as
> far as I know there are some source packages producing arch:all binaries
> that cannot be built on all architectures. A Build-Architecture-Indep
> field was proposed to indicate where it should be built in this case[1],
> but for now I think we can require that maintainers have to upload the
> arch:all packages in this case.

I think all proposed field names in that thread are rather confusing.
In Debian packaging lingo build means several things, it can mean at
least the build machine (!= host machine), or it can mean the act of
building.

In the case of Build-Depends style fields, it's referring to the act
of building, but Architecture is related to the host system/compiler,
so mixing the different meanings would be messy, think for example
about cross-compiling.

>   [1] 

Thanks,
Guillem


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140813114811.ga13...@gaara.hadrons.org

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2014-08-12, Octavio Alvarez  wrote:
>
>
> On 09/08/14 04:30, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>> Quoting envite (2014-08-09 10:43:25)
>>> XFCE (does not mount my USB disks)
>> 
>> Did you perhaps suppress recommends?
>
> Should this really be a Recommends?

It surely fits the definition of Recommends.

| The Recommends field should list packages that would be found together
| with this one in all but unusual installations.

/Sune


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/lsf8mk$10i$1...@ger.gmane.org

RE:2 months and no upload for pkg

[PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel]

Hello Charles

> Peer review can help, by making sure that the final controllers (the FTP 
> Master
> team) do not waste their time reporting defects that others could have found.

> You can find a process for peer review at the URL below.

>https://wiki.debian.org/CopyrightReview

I like a lot the idea, but don't you think that when entering the New Queues a 
package
should be automatically tag with copyright-review-requested.

this way it should be possible to add these bugs in how-can-i-help.

even better A script could automaticaly download two random packages, one with 
no review and one with already one review
when you have 20 minutes for Debian during the day. I find that the time spent 
to find a package for review is a pain.
it should be as simple as:

how-can-i-help --review

... review

reportbug --review
to fill the report and tag accordingly.

Cheers

Frederic

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/a2a20ec3b8560d408356cac2fc148e53b1ed5...@sun-dag3.synchrotron-soleil.fr

Re: Bug#757980: ITP: cryptography -- cryptography is a package which provides cryptographic recipes and primitives to Python developers.

[Henrique de Moraes Holschuh]

On Wed, 13 Aug 2014, Brian May wrote:
> * Package name: cryptography
...

> I imagine the binary package will be called python{,3}-cryptography.
> Haven't got to this step yet.

Wouldn't it be better to also have the source package name in the python-
namespace?  Its using a dictionary word for the name, this is going to
cause colisions sooner or later...

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140813082547.ga21...@khazad-dum.debian.net

Re: 2 months and no upload for pkg

[Amir Taaki]

Thank you.

On 13/08/14 09:20, Charles Plessy wrote:
>> Quoting Amir Taaki (gen...@riseup.net):
>>
>>> However, I think maybe this might have slipped through the cracks and
>>> has been missed. Any information would be much appreciated.
>>> The responsible team (Debian Bitcoin Team) seems to be dead judging from
>>> their mailing list.
> 
> Le Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 08:57:09AM +0200, Christian PERRIER a écrit :
>>
>> There is not much you can do, indeed, except patiently waiting. I had
>> to wait for such a long time for a package of mine (openambit) to
>> enter the archive, recently. But, given that I can't really offer the
>> FTPmaster team what they need the most (help), my only option isto
>> be patient
> 
> Hello Amir and everybody,
> 
> there is one thing that we can do: increase the quality of the packages that 
> we
> submit to the NEW queue.  Acording to one member of the FTP Master team, up to
> 80 % of the packages have a problem [0].  Indeed, when I and others have
> checked packages in the queue, it was not too hard to find imprecisions or
> omissions in the debian/copyright file.
> 
> Peer review can help, by making sure that the final controllers (the FTP 
> Master
> team) do not waste their time reporting defects that others could have found.
> 
> You can find a process for peer review at the URL below.
> 
> https://wiki.debian.org/CopyrightReview
> 
> Have a nice day,
> 
> [0] 
> https://lists.debian.org/alpine.deb.2.02.1408060907090.9...@jupiter.server.alteholz.net
> 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53eb1221.6000...@riseup.net

Re: 2 months and no upload for pkg

[Amir Taaki]

Hi!

Thanks for the response. I've had review on my license by the SFLC and
the FSF. See their responses here:

https://wiki.unsystem.net/en/index.php/Libbitcoin/License

Also I have emails from the Debian mailing list on this issue which I
can contribute. Is there anything I need to do to pass that link to the
FTPmaster team, or will they see it here?

Thanks!

On 13/08/14 08:57, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Quoting Amir Taaki (gen...@riseup.net):
> 
>> However, I think maybe this might have slipped through the cracks and
>> has been missed. Any information would be much appreciated.
>> The responsible team (Debian Bitcoin Team) seems to be dead judging from
>> their mailing list.
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> 
> That seems to be one of the cases where we suffer from the slow
> processing of the NEW queue. New packages have to be checked and
> approved by the Debian FTPmaster team. They doing a very thourough job
> in checking packages (particularly licensing) and, from what I
> witnessed during the last months, it takes more manpower than the team
> has (considering that the FTPmaster team has several other duties).
> 
> There is not much you can do, indeed, except patiently waiting. I had
> to wait for such a long time for a package of mine (openambit) to
> enter the archive, recently. But, given that I can't really offer the
> FTPmaster team what they need the most (help), my only option isto
> be patient
> 
> PS: please notice that in case the package is rejected for some
> reason, I noticed that it seems that the FTPmaster team prioritizes
> checking reuploaded packages (at least this is what happened with my
> recent NEW packages).
> 
> We're sometimes desperatly lacking manpower on some key positions in
> Debian, I'm afraid.
> 
> 
> (and I use this opportunity to thank the ftpmasters for their work and
> commitment)
> 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53eb105c.2030...@riseup.net

Re: 2 months and no upload for pkg

[Charles Plessy]

> Quoting Amir Taaki (gen...@riseup.net):
> 
> > However, I think maybe this might have slipped through the cracks and
> > has been missed. Any information would be much appreciated.
> > The responsible team (Debian Bitcoin Team) seems to be dead judging from
> > their mailing list.

Le Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 08:57:09AM +0200, Christian PERRIER a écrit :
> 
> There is not much you can do, indeed, except patiently waiting. I had
> to wait for such a long time for a package of mine (openambit) to
> enter the archive, recently. But, given that I can't really offer the
> FTPmaster team what they need the most (help), my only option isto
> be patient

Hello Amir and everybody,

there is one thing that we can do: increase the quality of the packages that we
submit to the NEW queue.  Acording to one member of the FTP Master team, up to
80 % of the packages have a problem [0].  Indeed, when I and others have
checked packages in the queue, it was not too hard to find imprecisions or
omissions in the debian/copyright file.

Peer review can help, by making sure that the final controllers (the FTP Master
team) do not waste their time reporting defects that others could have found.

You can find a process for peer review at the URL below.

https://wiki.debian.org/CopyrightReview

Have a nice day,

[0] 
https://lists.debian.org/alpine.deb.2.02.1408060907090.9...@jupiter.server.alteholz.net

-- 
Charles Plessy
Debian Med packaging team,
http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140813072057.ga28...@falafel.plessy.net

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

[Thomas Goirand]

On 08/11/2014 07:49 AM, Cameron Norman wrote:
> El dom, 10 de ago 2014 a las 11:39 , Kees de Jong 
> escribió:
>> Why are we discussing CD/DVD sizes? Why not just use an USB
>> netinstall? It's then possible to download and install the stuff you
>> need, if you don't want to use a lot of bandwidth then choose no
>> desktop environment or XFCE/LXDE. But if you can spare some more time
>> then you can install GNOME/KDE. Seems like a good deal. And USB sticks
>> are cheaper (also easier to reuse) so I don't get the 'hurting
>> developing countries' argument.
> 
> CDs are cheap and easy to distribute and customize (with the Debian logo
> and artwork). Yes, we all have a number of 1+ GB USB drives that could
> easily fit GNOME, but are we willing to give those away or sell them
> cheaply? Being able to distribute a Debian CD that does not need an
> internet connection to try out or install is really beneficial for
> gaining users.
> 
> elementary OS is hitting this issue with how expensive it is to make
> customized USB drives (with their logo and stuff). I think the best
> chance they have of being able to sell USB drives in their online store
> is just the elementary coloring (a distinctive light blue).
> 
> netinstall is difficult for unreliable or limited bandwidth network
> connections (luckily it is perfect for me, someone who uses GNOME and
> has a good internet connection :)

I can't agree with the price thing, when you can find USB keys for less
than 1USD online on taobao.com (or aliexpress.com if you can't read
Chinese). And I didn't search more than 20 seconds to find that... there
must be even cheaper, and it shouldn't be hard to find a company that
can customize the USB keys for you, if you know where to look for them
(eg: Shenzhen area), and if you want to mass-produce them. For smaller
quantities, then probably you can customize them yourself with cheap
stickers.

There's many other valid points for which having CD ISO images is
important, but price isn't one. And that's not the first time I explain
it. So please don't write about how expensive USB keys are again, this
kinds of repetitions aren't helping to move forward.

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

P.S: Is it really needed to cross-post in 7 lists?!? I've dropped all
lists but debian-devel@.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53eb109b.8020...@debian.org