Perhaps "enable" would be a better word than "allow". It changes focus from the system to the user which is consistent with the ideals of Free Software. I remember the last position I had where I begged and bullied our PCs to update with that other OS. Changing to Debian GNU/Linux and using APT enabled us to increase the number of PCs in the system several times while decreasing the effort. I felt my life was changed from labouring in waist-deep water to leaping over tall buildings with ease.
I don't think it is possible to over-sell APT. It's one of the many reasons one might choose GNU/Linux and in particular Debian GNU/Linux. APT facilitates three of the four freedoms of Free Software, making it easier to run, modify and distribute the software and APT facilitates examining the code at the level of locating packages. APT leverages the efforts of FLOSS developers and Debian package maintainers to help everyone who uses Debian GNU/Linux have safe, reliable and efficient IT. There are plenty of force-multipliers in Debian GNU/Linux: the Linux kernel, openSSH, LTSP, sh, etc. but APT plus those makes the case for "universal operating system". If there ever will be a "Lifetime Achievement Award" for a distro, Debian should get it and APT could be the decisive achievement. On Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Justin B Rye <justin.byam....@gmail.com>wrote: > David Prévot wrote: > > Le 16/04/2013 23:13, Robert Pogson a écrit : > >> To the extent that more people using Debian GNU/Linux will make the > world > >> a better place, I suggest these features not be "undersold". I propose > >> this wording for that paragraph, > > > > Please, find it attached in diff format (after slight editing), with the > > full updated source page. The resulted page can be seen on my test > > server too: > > > > http://www.tilapin.org/debian/intro/about.en#what > > > > Let me add the Debian L10n English team into the loop (that allows me to > > thank Justin for his tireless work, very welcome by the current DPN > > editors by the way), and ask if the proposed change is OK. Since there > > is more than one package manager, I’m not sure it’s the role of this > > page to focus only on this one (as done for good reason in other places > > like the release notes). > > There's an argument that APT is more fundamental, in that aptitude, > synaptic, etc. are all based on the APT libraries. It's true that > even a Debian system with just dpkg and dselect is already entitled to > claim that it has a package manager, but I think these days we're > entitled to leave dselect out of our adverts if we like. > > I'm more worried that maybe we're _over_-selling APT with this claim > that these tools "allow a user to manage thousands of packages on > thousands of computers as easily as installing a single application". > But getting rid of my old bugbear the verb "allow" would fix that: > > machine), a package manager (APT) and other utilities that make it > possible > to manage thousands of packages on thousands of computers as easily as > installing a single application. All of it <a href="free">free</a>. > > Normally for a debconf review where I was imposing the "d-l-e house > stylesheet" I would also insert a serial comma after "(APT)", but I > think the Debian web pages are mostly consistent in following a > stylesheet with no such commas. For instance, the previous paragraph > has "GNU/Linux, GNU/kFreeBSD and GNU/Hurd". > -- > JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian > sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package > -- Robert Pogson Have server, will travel...
