On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 11:26:01AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Fri, 16 May 2008, Martin Uecker wrote: > > > Requiring distro specific changes feels wrong anyway. Software > > should be coupled by standardized interfaces. But I might be naive > > here. What are the distro specific changes we are talking about? > > It'd be great[0] if we never had to do distribution specific > changes.[1] However, considering the amount of software which is not > LSB compliant, FHS compliant, policy compliant, ships internal > libraries, has upstreams who don't understand API and ABIs, has slow > release cycles, has insane upstreams, or otherwise includes bugs which > need to be fixed, that'll only rarely be the case for some very simple > packages.
[...] > 1: One could argue that if you can't come up with a relatively large > list of distribution specific changes that need to be made yourself, > you've not done the research to make useful suggestions for radically > altering how Debian actually does development. Knowing the problem > comes before the knowing answer. Because LBS, FHS, APIs and ABIs, slow release cycles, insane upstreams and bugs are Debian specific issues? I don't think so.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
