The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A rather radical beta-test announcement for you to consider

> On Fri, 26 Apr 1996, David H. Silber wrote:
>
> > Raul Miller says:
> 
> > > If we want to distinguish debian systems from non debian systems
> > > yet also position ourselves as a base system which ought to be part of
> > > other distributions, I think we shouldn't call what we produce a
> > > "distribution" but a [package] management system, or something along
> > > that line.
> > 
> > Ahh, that's a thought!   Perhaps ``Debian'' could be a distribution built
> > upon our ``Linux Base'' package management system.  This would allow us to
> > separate the name-space a little bit.  Users would be informed of ``Debian
> > Releases'', while distribution maintainers and those who want/need to be on
> > the cutting edge could be informed of package updates for ``Linux Base''.
> 
> David, I think you're the first person who's got this idea right (no 
> offence, Bruce, but ...).  This would have the desired effect of 
> providing the Base system, while detracting nothing from Debian itself: 
> Debian would just be one of these `value added distributions', and a 
> model for how we think other distributions should be put together.  Or 

(Including the fact that the Debian distribution provides support to the
Linux Base.)

> does that sound too arrogant? - I'm not really into marketing, I'm sure 
> it can be worded better by someone who is.
> 
> The only trouble here is that some work will be needed to split up Debian 
> from the Base system - and if we want this to be a model for other 
> distributions to follow, we *must* get it right first time ....  So on 
> those grounds, maybe this should be delayed until 1.2, by which time we 
> can write a proper specification which we then follow ourselves and give 
> to other distribution maintainers.  [By coincidence, that process is 
> analogous to my work with Braille access - the first release will be all 
> together, then afterwards it will be split up and follow a 
> not-yet-written spec.]

I don't see that it would take that much work to make Debian a distribution
built on top of the base system.  We need to change all of the documentation
so that instead of specifying ``Debian'', whatever name the distribution uses
would be specified.  Certain documents would need to be re-written to refer
to ``Linux Base'' instead of a specific distribution.  Various packages and
programs should be renamed.  Although I don't think that we have that much
work to do to make Debian be a distribution built on top of the Linux Base,
I do agree that it should probably take effect with release 1.2.  In the
meantime, we can stabilize the system a bit, add more features and packages
and perhaps find a few distributions who would be happy to drop a large
chunk of their work and/or spin off a few specialty distributions of our own.
(Hey Nikhil, want to put together a ``Braille access'' CD?)  This way, when
we say that we want to be the standard base system, there is a reason to take
us seriously.


> Nikhil.


-- 
  David H. Silber     dhs@firefly.com     Project: Refinance the house!
  <http://www.access.digex.net/~dhs/>     Project: lockstep

			     Programmer for hire.