Re: [seul-edu] Re: ISO project--a different approach

[Doug Loss <drloss@suscom.net>]

Ben Armstrong wrote:

>For the the stuff that is already packaged for Debian, the CD could contain
>the DEBs from woody (and all libraries/other dependencies required by those
>DEBs if you want the CD to be totally self-contained).  
>
If it's already packaged for Debian and included in Debian, I don't see 
any reason for us to put those DEBs on our ISO.  Not doing so would 
allow us more room for things that _aren't_ included.  But if you think 
it would be a good idea to have them on our ISO for completeness's sake, 
we'll certainly consider it.

>For the stuff that
>isn't packaged for Debian, quick-and-dirty "alienized" RPM -> DEBs could be
>provided.  Of course this is not without potential problems, so even with
>alien helping to automate the process, some hand-checking needs to be done
>before it goes to CD.  In some cases doing proper Debianization of the
>packages will be easier.
>  
>
I'd raather get them properly packaged as DEBs.  As I said, least common 
denominator isn't what we're looking for.

>Of course, if this is material for which there is no barrier to going into
>Debian main, you may be able to interest debian-edu or debian-jr in doing
>official packages and have them added to Debian.  As for other stuff (take,
>for example, a Java app that doesn't work without a non-free implementation
>of Java) it could possibly be packaged for contrib or non-free, but you are
>less likely to find interested parties in debian-edu or debian-jr.  Still,
>it wouldn't hurt to ask Debian by way of a "RFP" (Request for Package)
>wishlist bug to put onto our todo list.
>  
>
I think once we've settled on our software list submitting RFPs to 
Debian for all of them is definitely the way to go.  It would save us 
work too, if Debian makes DEBs of the majority of our apps!

>In summary, the CD could contain:
>
>- tarballs for all software
>- RPMs for all software
>- DEBs for all software:
>  - official DEBs where possible
>  - unofficial DEBs for:
>    - contrib/non-free
>    - main, but no DEB available yet
>
>Naturally, if you include contrib/non-free software, it is up to you as the
>CD "vendor" to ensure you are not in violation of the licenses of each piece
>of included software by including it on the CD.
>  
>
I think this is a good design for the ISO, although I'm not sure if we 
need to include official DEBs that are already part of Debian.  What's 
your feeling on that, Ben, Raphael, and other Debian folks here?

Doug Loss