Re: SEUL: Re: Proposal for using a single mailing list [was Re: Oneend-user distribution?]

[Kevin Forge <forgeltd@usa.net>]

Michel Stam wrote:
> > > As I said, we could make use of this by putting all these packages together to
> > > create something very good.
> >
> > It already is something very good. It is a complete linux distribution.
> > You can download it and use it.
> >
> 
> But has it been completed already ? What I am suggesting is help to get everything
> completed a little faster by trying to use as much the same software as possible.

Yes it is "complete" in that you can burn it onto a CD and hand it to
a newbie and expect he will have _less_ trouble with Indi than he dose
with RedHat.

> > > This is something we could do, but it would still mean three different groups
> > > trying to accomplish the same thing.
> >
> > Wrong.
> >
> > the three groups are doing different things.
> >
> 
> Wrong again, I think we are both talking about three different groups here.
> 
> >
> > > Don't you think that by working together we
> > > could accomplish a lot more in a lot less time ?
> >
> > Only to a small degree. We are doing different things , it's not like Laet
> > , SEUL, and independence are doing exactly the same thing.
> >
> 
> We are doing the same thing - We are all creating a Linux distribution. It may look a
> little different, but in essential it is the same.
> 
> >
> > > I disagree; To get people to use Linux means that it should have a familiar look
> >
> > Someone who is running the installer is already going to use linux ( so
> > doesn't need to be converted )  provided the installation works. And then
> > they will not run it again for some time.
> >
> 
> The installation is not easy enough for a user not knowing about his own computer.
> Someone who has no idea of the hardware in his computer will have a very hard time
> configuring Linux. That too is part of the installation process. Some people I know of
> wanted to stop using Linux because they could not get it configured using the
> commandline tools available. So aside from the installation process for copying the
> various packages to the harddisk, the installation process should also contain utilities
> for configuring Linux. Though work for this is in progress, not everything can be
> configured by utilities a the moment (unless you count vi among these).
> 
> > > > this is really for the big distros to fight about. Now if anyone can get
> > > > something like LSB working, this would be nice ...
> >
> > > Why ? Because we are small we are not allowed to do this ? Someone's got
> >
> > no. Because if you can't convince Redhat, Debian and SuSE to accept your
> > standard, then noone will take it seriously. You can form your own
> > standards body, but ultimately, everything rests on whether the big boys
> > listen to you.
> >
> > -- Donovan
> 
> I did not talk about convincing RH, Debian, SuSe or whatever distribution. The
> suggestion I made was to standardize our way of placing binaries and configuration files
> in directories, as well as version requirements for libraries etc. to ensure that a
> program that runs on one distribution (for instance, LaetOS) runs on another as well
> (for instance, Independence).
> 
> That way, it is possible to share the binaries as well as the sources. It means that a
> package created for Independence would always work on LaetOS or LED.
> 
> Think about it.
> 
> Michel