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: Can I interest anyone in RPM?

On Tue 23 Sep 1997, Martin Buck wrote:
> What's the use of a standard packaging system, if there are subtle
> differences between the distributions using it? All the RPM-based
> distribtions use a slighly different /etc/init.d-layout, may have different
> package-names for the same packages, use different sonames for shared
> libraries and so on.

all you say is true : rpm/deb is one point that is different, if you
compare distributions, but it is only one thing of a long list (my last
list was 25 items). 

reason to switch to rpm : marketing.
this might sound sily, but it is the case. rpm has a good marketing, deb
not. i want to make debian the base distribution of choice (see my other
posting), and as sily as it might sound, we need rpm to do that.
but we could build a rpm, that looks like deb, works like deb, is as
stable as deb, and is called rpm. we should try to join our code with
rpm, or build rpm with deb like features.

but it must have the name "rpm", and all other distributions need to use
it. only for marketing reasons.

and of course, we should also find standards for the other differences
between linux distributions.

> > I don't think Debian is its packaging system. Debian is the open development
> > paradigm, the volunteers, and the committment to free software. What we use
> > to package that software is irrelevant.

debian is free work, good quality, and the possibility for everyone to
become maintainer and chaange something. i got maintainer, because after
every new installation my system changes more and more, till it didn't
look like the original distribution. now it does.

> So when it's irrelevant, why should we switch to RPM? I couldn't find any
> convincing arguments in your message.

90 % : marketing
10 % : new features (rpm's are pgp signed, and they had this feature 2
		years ago. and we still don't have this feature !)

note : I don't say "drop deb". i say "merge deb and rpm, and call it rpm."

this is very important, and i agree with bruce (i never thought i will
ever say that) : switch to rpm ! merge deb and rpm and call it rpm !
make debian the best distribution and the base distribution of choice !

andreas


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .