Jeremy Huntwork wrote: > Hello Everyone, > > It has recently been suggested to me that the LFS LiveCD project be > killed. The main arguments for this are, essentially: > > 1) It is currently unmaintained
ISTM this point is moot *if* the community wants to keep it. This is rather a *result* of ... insufficient "marketing" or an overall lack of health in LFS? As with all aspects of a project like this, community interest must be constantly prodded so that apathy doesn't set in. > 2) It removes the essential prerequisite of being able to configure a > Linux system I don't see this. I've installed LFS from many years ago and from the Live CD. Configuration is still required, it's just that the user has the option of how detailed to get in his/her own efforts. Let's accept that there will always be users who will grab some convenient distro, throw it on their system with little or no thought and start LFSing. Eliminating the LFS Live CD will not change this. If there is a strong belief that this aspect of the Live CD is contrary to overall LFS project goals, a better response may be to modify the Live CD sub-project to be more in conformance with the major project's goals. > 3) It leads to less testing from other hosts Maybe a valid point. But if LFS feels that is a significant issue, what are the solutions? Kill a perfectly viable tool to (ostensibly) force users to (install) run from other distros? The result *might* be fewer new LFS users, thereby negating the perceived benefit. Enlist community members to become more proactive in testing? This might require something more rigorous in organizational structure and commitments from project/community members. Often hard to achieve. ISTM that the cause of the perceived problem might be just as easily assigned to other LFS sub-projects, such as automated LFS, etc. Any time users (especially newer ones) are not enthusiastically digging into the books and making code, whether by hand or self-generated scripts, you have effectively less testing. If this is really a problem, it seem arbitrary in the extreme to assign blame to Live CD without some kind of supporting data other than opinions. Does not the automated LFS also lead to contravening of overall LFS goals? Should it also be killed? What about Secure of Cross LFS? Neither of these support the basic project goal of teaching users how to build, install and configure a "basic" system for the purpose of basic education. BLFS? etc., etc., etc. > 4) A seeming lack of community interest in contributing. Especially, > essential testing (and reports on the results of tests!) on varied > hardware does not seem to be taking place See 1 above. However, could it be really due to a decreased level of participation in LFS as a whole? What do stats on downloads and web site hits over the last few years show? If it is due to a general malaise about the project, eliminating the Live CD would exacerbate that situation, not help it. > > As you may guess, I have mixed feelings about this. But after reflecting > on it a bit, my hesitancy to agree comes mostly from personal attachment > to the CD and perhaps not what is best for LFS. Don't let that bother you. We should all be so lucky as to have enthusiasm about the things we work on. From my past experience with LFS some years ago, I saw what I believed to be an increased level of purely parochial interest and reduced altruism from the community. I expected that without change LFS might begin to have reduced participation by the community. I don't know if that is correct, but ISTM this time around (about a year of just watching just this support list) there is a lot less activity, timely support response and I see just a few "old timers" that are still active on the support list and very few "new timers". If you have doubts about your hesitancy, examine the proposed arguments in the light of overall project parameters and activities. Consider alternative explanations for causes of problems assigned (maybe erroneously) to LFS Live CD. > > At this point I need community input. I realize that many of you may use > and appreciate the CD, just as I do. But realistically, this project > will die of its own if it does not get some help. And if that happens, > then LFS would be better off removing the dead weight. I don't want to offend any other parts of the project, so I'm going to try and be delicate here. Hard for me. Based on activity on this list only, the whole project is essentially dead weight now. Parts of it may be quite vibrant, but as a project overall, there is much similar to a business: if it's not growing it's dying. My perception might be totally wrong: it is based only on what I see on this list. But this list should be where we see the majority of new users, support for initial help requests wit lots of project and community members jumping in to help newer users. Compared to several years ago, current activity is very low. > > I have some energy and some ideas to put back into the project, but only > if I get some help with development and testing. I need to know two things: > > * Does the community still want the LiveCD project? (Consider that a > couple of the arguments above imply that the LFS LiveCD by its nature is > degrading the quality of LFS) I think the Live CD should remain. *If* my assessment detailed above is correct, it is not the Live CD project that is dragging LFS down (*if* that is true at all). More likely the opposite. > > * If so, is the community prepared to lend help in keeping it alive? Within time constraints, I know I would make a commitment to provide help where I could. Of course, one needs a good strong core group to take care of the fundamentals and a much larger active community to fill in many areas that can't be easily addressed within the constraints that must necessarily exist for the core group. > > If the answer to both questions is not a solid yes, I'm afraid that > we'll have no choice but to kill the project. This might be desirable from your POV just for the sake of peace of mind. One doesn't want to continue to "throw good money after bad" and if you don't get a strong sense of support and commitment from the project and community, this is what you would be doing. Sometimes better to move on, realizing that what you have accomplished is good on its own merits but can not continue successfully in the current environment. > > -- > JH > All MHO - inaccuracies and all. <dons flame-retardent suit and activitates fire suppression system> -- Wit -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
