Joined: Feb. 2007
||Posted: Mar. 15 2007,14:16
|Quote (dougz @ Mar. 14 2007,17:13)|
|I've run both DSL-N and Fluxbuntu. Yes, Fluxbuntu is stripped down, compared to Ubuntu, but it still contains some idiosyncratic bloat of its own. Very much driven by the vision of a very few people. I'd disagree that Fluxbuntu is anywhere near the maturity of DSL-N. It's also far bigger & slower. Current iso is 309 MB. Fluxbuntu DL page.|
Far bigger? Compare apples to apples. It has the latest versions of various apps, which I recall you said DSL-N should provide. That accounts for a lot of it. To do what you've recommended, DSL-N will at least double. And if you mean that DSL-N should only provide more recent apps in the repository, you can start adding some of the extensions you want -- that's a community effort, not strictly the realm of the developers.
|Fluxbuntu is only superficially like DSL-N. DSL-N is built on Knoppix, as well as Debian, technology. DSL-N allows Frugal, while Fluxbuntu doesn't. Also UNC, UCI, etc. DSL-N was looking like the very best bet for a truly mini 2.6. distro.|
You want to use Ubuntu repositories in lieu of Debian. It would probably be easier to rebuild DSL-N from scratch on Ubuntu instead of Knoppix so that would be far more seamless.
If DSL-N remains Knoppix-based and more real Debian- than Ubuntu-oriented, let users decide how they want their systems to be -- just like now. You're not limited to using old stable or stable pools. Testing and unstable can mixed and matched, e.g.:
My computing needs are a little too critical to do that, but others who want to be on the bleeding edge can still run testing or unstable, or build the latest from code.
UNC/UCI extensions aren't suitable for the target audience -- traditional hard drive install -- to whom you want DSL-N to cater. UCIs can work on a hard drive install, but in a way that's totally counter your "lazy" and easier ethic.
|I agree that most people are lured into the "need" for the latest, greatest, most current release.|
Gotta disagree with you. If the users want something, whether you or I personally agree, their desires should be taken into consideration. If a user wants a highly efficient DSL-N but then wants to install the latest & greatest mplayer, fine. They may need a feature you or I don't. It's all about choice! More DSL-N users makes for a more vibrant DSL-N user community. The user community is one of DSL's strengths and the huge Ubuntu user & developer community is also a huge advantage to all users of Debian-derived distros.
Our disagreement isn't over whether users should be able to add whatever applications they want. We're both on the same page: anyone should be able to configure his or her system however he or she sees fit. Our disagreement is over the execution of that and whether it's the job of the user or the developers. I think the developers should be focused on providing a stable base rather than the minutiae bells and whistles users add anyway.
One can already configure or re-configure and extend (and even remaster) DSL/DSL-N or any other distro however one sees fit. That's a user issue, and it's only a developer issue to the extent that developers can make things easier or more difficult. I think the underlying philosophy of DSL/DSL-N makes it easy enough. There's also the community support here in the forums and wikis. It's a well-documented project.
Re the small group of Fluxbuntu developers: How many developers are running the show with DSL/DSL-N? I don't judge things on that basis. It only tells me a larger development group may be faster or slower than with one or two developers -- take a look at Gentoo's growth when it was headed by one person and look at what having too many developers has done to it since he left.
Finally, you mentioned Mint's addition of certain things to "ease" user experience. Some of those things are closed-source. Dittos for Ubuntu's use of proprietary drivers in the past (though they recently announced the next release will be totally open source). Do you think DSL-N should include any closed-source code -- drivers, Opera, etc. -- in the name of keeping things easy and functional, or should it stay true to the foundations of open source in general and Debian in particular?
"It felt kind of like having a pitbull terrier on my rear end."
-- meo (copyright(c)2008, all rights reserved)