Re: [TCLUG:9416] MediaOne Roadrunner and Linux (fwd)

["John R. Sheets" <dusk@ravendusk.org>]

On Oct 27, 1999, Christopher Reid Palmer <reid@pconline.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Oct 1999, John R. Sheets wrote:
> 
> > No matter how good Redhat's intentions are, they are still subject to a
> > certain insider's approach.
> 
> Yeah, and you know what else they're subject to? Intense scrutiny of their
> code and packages by millions of motivated geeks.

...who can only offer their suggestions and hope Redhat decides to
include the changes in the official distribution.  We're lucky that
Redhat is very good in this area, so mostly my argument here is a moot
point.

> > If they are going to sell a stable distribution (as opposed
> > to giving it away for free), they *have* to make sure the packages all
> > work together.  This makes it very dangerous for them to accept
> > unsolicited packages.
> 
> *ahem* contrib/

Right, but how important is contrib to Redhat, really?  How high of a
profile does it get?  With Redhat, it's more of a side avenue, than the
primary avenue like with Debian.  I guess my real question is, how does
one get their software included into Redhat's contrib section?  Post and
Pray?  Anonymous FTP?  (I don't know, I'm asking.)  (c:

> > > I don't recommend Debian due to the holier than though attitude
> > > I continually see from the users.
> > 
> > I have heard these exact same sentiments in the Linux vs. Microsoft
> > arguments
> 
> Mark was talking about the non-Debian-hating spirit, not the Debian-loving
> spirit.

Well, yes, that is different.  This is a simple rule of Linux advocacy,
though, not to mention a basic tenet of human decency.  But that doesn't
change my confusion about why that makes the distribution itself
beneath consideration.  If Debian is good, why refuse to use it because
a few loud-mouthed people are saying some obnoxious things?  The choice to
advocate a distribution or not should be based on its technical merits,
not the opinions of a few users.  Should I become a Republican just because
I don't like what a couple Democrat congressmen from a different state
are hollering about?  (c:

Honestly, I've seen very little of this negative non-Debian bashing.

> > > The question is, is debian willing to work with RedHat to work on
> > > a single packaging system format?
> > 
> > IMHO, this is a noble request, but not a fair demand to make.  Both
> > distributions have built their empires around their packaging systems.
> > Massive resources have already been allocated to support each format.
> > Whichever dist made the change would have to face a very large, irate
> > crowd of their users, which would have an immediate and deadly impact on
> > their respective user base.
> 
> Not so, because the presence of one packaging system does not preclude the
> presence of the other.

But I wasn't talking about simultaneous existence, but rather the
process of transition from one system to another.  That is a *huge*
thing to ask of a distribution.  This comes back to the contrib thing.
Redhat may be able to change the packages in their distribution to
Debian format, but that leaves all the unofficial contributors in the
lurch with their RPM's.  And Debian has literally thousands (?) of
packages, which would make for an even worse transition, to RPM.  It
would be nice to have a single packaging format, but my point is that
it's not going to happen, at least between RPM<-->DEB.

> > How would the Redhat developers/maintainers feel if they had to convert 
> > their hundreds of RPMs over to DEB format?
[snip]
> 
> I see a lot of words, but I don't see a point.

My point is in the previous paragraph.  Demanding a single packaging
format is not only a burden on the distributor, but also on the entire
development community who supports that packaging format.  You can't
just ask Redhat or Debian to change.  You have to ask the community as a
whole.

John

P.S.--Just to clear the air, I'm playing a bit of the Devil's Advocate
here.  I prefer Debian (and use it here at work), but still quite
happily run Redhat at home.