From: "Martin, Stephen" <stephen.martin@veridian.com>
To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo part IIa.
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 10:46:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3F143DE4.4000100@veridian.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3F141CB1.70704@gentoo.org>
Brad Laue wrote:
> Debian may be stable, but Woody's sheer age really does indicate that
> something is wrong with their development model. I don't imagine
> suggesting a faster paced release model to their core developers would
> be met with much openness, nor would it be put to a vote. FreeBSD and
> RedHat, to name two, have live package build systems (ports/rawhide
> respectively) and cut a release from these every four months on the dot
> with impeccable QA. I don't think I could suggest such a thing to Debian
> developers without being laughed out of the discussion.
>
My impression is that the paralysis we've all seen in the Debian
community is due to two factors: 1) ridiculously inflexible rules
regarding free vs. non-free software and 2) a
we're-the-best-and-don't-need-to-change attitude. I've seen long and
apparently serious discussions on the Debian lists over whether gcc
should be removed from the main distro because the man pages aren't
released under a "free" license. I've seen hundreds (who knows,
thousands?) of posts describing problems with apt-get and deselect
dismissed cavilierly. In my opinion THAT is what's killing Debian - the
inability to distinguish worthwhile questions from intellectual
masturbation and the unwillingness to accept criticism. I don't see
either of these elements present in Gentoo now, and I don't see zhen's
proposals changing that.
As for the long time between Debian releases, it seems to me that trying
to support 10,000 packages on 11 architectures with "rock-solid
stability" is a big part of that. Again, I don't see anything in zhen's
proposal on that order of magnitude. Certainly, asking one attendee of
a meeting to dump a log to the website isn't going to slow development.
Heck, the glacial pace of Debian releases wouldn't even be a problem if
their upgrade system was robust. "Install the old version, then run
apt-get upgrade repeatedly until the conflicts go away" isn't
acceptable. Again, Gentoo does not suffer from this problem - it's
essentially a releaseless distro.
--
Stephen C. Martin
PGP/GnuPG key 1024D/8C4FCA5D
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-15 17:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-15 13:42 [gentoo-dev] Gentoo part IIa John Davis
[not found] ` <1058280489.2910.27.camel@biproc>
2003-07-15 15:06 ` John Davis
2003-07-15 16:15 ` Grant Goodyear
2003-07-15 15:24 ` Brad Laue
2003-07-15 17:44 ` [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] " John Davis
2003-07-15 17:46 ` Martin, Stephen [this message]
2003-07-15 17:47 ` John Davis
2003-07-15 19:09 ` [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] " Stewart Honsberger
2003-07-15 19:23 ` [gentoo-dev] Gentoo part III? Daniel Robbins
2003-07-15 20:27 ` John Davis
2003-07-16 0:30 ` Daniel Robbins
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3F143DE4.4000100@veridian.com \
--to=stephen.martin@veridian.com \
--cc=gentoo-dev@gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox