On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 12:51:21 +0100, Michael Meskes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 04:04:22PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
>> It seems to me than one of the main value of Debian is in the
>> quality of its core distribution. One of the reason of the quality
>> is that it is not developed for itself but as a platform for the
>> 10^4+ packages and the 10+ architectures in Debian. For example the
>> compiler must be ... Given that, an attempt to develop the core
>> distribution as a separate entity is going to be impractical and to
>> reduce its quality.
> Why? In fact you are proving your own argument wrong. If a seperate
> core distribution is developed as a core of more, let alone all,
> Linux distributions including Debian, the amount of packages using
> it as platform will certainly increase.
Only if this separate entity also is committed to all 11
architectures. And follows a consistent technical policy. Ans is
supported by a QA team, security team, and potentially 1000
experienced developers to pick up slack.
I am not sure I am convinced that the benefits are worth
outsourcing the core of our product -- and I think that most business
shall tell you that is a bad idea.
>> As a practical matter, what if the Debian gcc team decide to
>> release etch with gcc 3.3 because 3.4 break ABI on some platforms
>> and gcc-4.x is not stable enough on all the platforms ? Will LCC
>> follow ? If not, how are we going to share binary package if we do
>> not use the same compiler?
> Another reason why we should work together as the problem will arise
> with the other dists anyway.
I think that very often Debian's technical solution have been
better than the other distributions, since there is a tendency to do
the right thing in Debian, as opposed to meeting marketing deadlines.
manoj
--
The time is right to make new friends.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
