Re: Better brand recognition for new Debian (etch)
First of all, thanks for your answers. > IMHO, there is a series of (serious) problems in such a plan, such > as: > > * we *do* have, after all, "tasks" to install desktops and (some, > specialized?) servers, without having to resort to creating > another 30G of repositories. Well, you have a valid point here. And I must admit that I forgot about that simple fact (tasks) for a moment. Anyway, I still see an opportunity for improvement :-) Yes, the tasks come right after installing base system and reboot. But maybe (I say: maybe) they should be moved, or at least described earlier in the process. A whole lot of defaults could be preset based on such initial choice, even components of the base system! Come on, is it really needed to have _exactly_ the same base system and initial set of programs on the server as well as on desktop system? I don't know, I'm just asking. On the other hand, I wasn't thinking about creating repositories, just "profiles" above them. Under the cover there still could be only stable / testing / whatever, like it is right now. In such case "profiles" could be seen as another layer of abstraction. Anyway, I'm not going to fight for it because: * you've reminded me about tasks, and indeed I'm fine with that * I am no Ian Murdock's advocate by any means, that was his original idea, possibly incompatible with The Debian Way. If he wants something, let he defend his ideas himself ;-) Thanks again for the answers. Friendly, Wiktor Wandachowicz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Better brand recognition for new Debian (etch)
==--==--==--== Hello all Debian folks! First of all I would like to congratulate all Debian developers and maintainers for releasing sarge. Good job! (and a big relief for all of you, I guess) Having a Debian installed on 10 Sun Blade boxes and helping a bit on debian-boot with debian-installer I can safely say that I am also concerned with the future of Debian. Lately I have spotted an interesting entry in Ian Murdock's Weblog (http://ianmurdock.com/?p=239), where he points out that in order to get a better user recognition and vendor support some _naming_ changes may be required. After reading the post I can say that indeed there are some ideas worth to be at least considered. What I am referring to is that not only stable / testing / sid repositories are enough. Maybe just after a little bit of tweaking Debian could get some more "profiles" called server / desktop also? What this means for developers, is to "link" (or understand) such profiles as server == stable, and desktop == testing. On the other hand, maybe some more "profiles" would be required, such as: stable-server, stable-desktop, testing-server and testing-desktop? Almost all Linux users would clearly recognize from this naming scheme what is what and what for. I send this post to debian-devel just in order to notify you about these ideas. Think about it, could you? There are some more good ideas in the article. Just see it for yourself. Friendly, Wiktor Wandachowicz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
