Slashdot Mirror
Debian Project Votes To Postpone Policy Changes
jonoxer writes "A little while ago members of the Debian project voted to make changes to the Social Contract. As previously reported on Slashdot, the end result looked likely to be a delay in the release of Sarge, the next Stable edition of Debian, until 2005. But on Saturday Debian developers voted to postpone the changes until after Sarge releases, effectively affirming that the changes need to be made but making a pragmatic decision to not let the next release be delayed as a result. The official voting page doesn't show the result yet, but it's been semi-officially announced."
Debian is probably the best/most stable GNU/Linux available, and if a sarge ver can accomodate the world--the better we are for it. as a redhatian, turned debianite...I'd say we are on the verge of a major breakthrough...
We're like rats, in some experiment! -- George Costanza
When I heard that a policy change might delay the new release until next year, I was really bummed. That's my one big debian problem--the politcs seem to gum up the works all too frequently. I'm glad to see that this will be put aside until the very much needed next release. YAY DEBIAN!
On a side note, anyone ever take an up-to-date testing machine and convert it to stable at release time? Did it, uh, work?
Debian is something different from most other Linux distributions - it is the absolute high ground, the place which could withstand a legal flood that would wash away any other distribution in existance. That is its function, in my view. There is Redhat/Fedora for pragmatic server use, Mandrake for latest and greatest and friendliest. Debian is adhering to a PRINCIPLE.
Most of us don't like adhering to principles - it really sucks because you have to give up things. In this case you give up convenience and non-free software being hidden safely in the background. For many people that price is too high. That's fine - use another distro! There are others who cater to that. Anyone using Debian has no business objecting to that philosophy - it is the primary reason Debian exists. People not contributing it have no voice at all, nor should they expect one. Think they're dumb for not being pragmatic? Guess how much that matters.
Debian is what happens when you take potential legal problems to heart and try to do what it takes to avoid them. I rather suspect that Debian ultimately wants there to be ZERO chance of any successful lawsuit about anything in the distribution, although I don't know if that is an explicit policy. That's hard, in our society. (What they probably REALLY want is no chance of a lawsuit being brought against them period, but the laws of the US at least don't allow that.)
Debian is about Freedom first, and software second. I see no problem with them releasing and then implimenting the policy changes, since there is not likely to be any increased risk compared to their current release. But if I'm wrong for whatever reason, they should ignore all critics and take whatever time they need to Do It Right. That is done too little nowadays, particularly in Free Software where theoretically Doing It Right is the motivation.
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
If I had to pick one great failing in the business world, it'd be "too many irons in the fire". Many a company has tried to sell you everything and anything- and thusfar, the only company to do it successfully has been Walmart, and that's at least partially from stepping on their workers like they're dirt, but that's another story for another time.
Debian excels at being reliable and "serious". I don't use it because, unfortunately, it's not even -remotely- close to current; it's about two weeks shy of two years old. However, it is serving a specific market, and it should not pander to trying to please everyone. Mandrake is worse, in my opinion- they still want to be everything from your desktop to your server; they excel in the desktop arena, and that is where they should focus for the same reason.
Do one thing, do it well- and never have to worry about pleasing everyone, having conflicting goals, etc. You'll never have to say, "well, this configuration system will never be understood by new linux users!"- because your market is experienced linux users who will appreciate extra functionality (by the way, this is a mythical example).
I've never used Debian, but understand the advantages and have a few friends who prefer it. I like and use Mandrake on desktop systems I have to use regularly; my personal "servers" get Gentoo. Redhat is what I use for business/enterprise stuff.
Please help metamoderate.
Aren't longer release cycles better for production enviroments? If you have 500 servers do you really want to update every month (except for critical bug fixes which you can get by putting apt-get in a crontab)?
My number was hyperbole, but people think Debian is behind the times because the last "stable" release, Woody, came out in 2002. A lot has happened in the Linux community since then (Woody came out when Linux kernel v.2.2 was still all the rage). However, they neglect to realize that you use the stable branch if you want a rock-solid platform, not a platform with the latest software versions.
For everything else, you should use the unstable branch, not stable. Unstable tends to have releases all the way up to the day the source was released for most packages.
Software is... software. Its not a cure for some social ills, its purpose is defined by the usability it brings to people.
And free software brings more usability to people by being free.
In any case, everything is just itself. Cotton is just cotton, whether it's grown by slaves or free farmers on their own farm. That doesn't mean that what we use and how we choose it doesn't have consequences.
Debian unstable (Sid) is not absolutely fine for desktop use. Unstable does break. Recently Samba and parts of KDE could not coexist due to print library dependancies. This is not acceptable for computers that are used for work.
Debian stable is ancient. There have been some nice software updates in the past two years. Using backports.org is a solution, but has its own problems. The quality of backports is not garanteed to be as good as Debian proper. More importantly security updates are garanteed to be released promptly.
Just because unstable is acceptable for your use, does not make it acceptable for the rest of us.