| 1 |
On 22/05/06, Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> There are serious costs involved with forking something. For gentoo this |
| 3 |
> would include image problems by being seen as "evil" forkers. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Surely such decisions should be based on technical merit, and not |
| 6 |
political? The technical cost of forking is small. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> Also |
| 9 |
> mandriva, suse, ubuntu etc. distinguish themselves from the pack in which |
| 10 |
> packages are offered in which configuration. Gentoo differs from that in |
| 11 |
> that users can determine the configuration. The package manager directly |
| 12 |
> influences the freedom available for the users. Making binary and source |
| 13 |
> distros not easilly comparable. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I'm not sure I follow this line of reasoning - other distros can have |
| 16 |
external package managers because their users have less freedom? Are |
| 17 |
you concerned about the political effect of there being less to |
| 18 |
distinguish Gentoo from clones, or the fact that an external package |
| 19 |
manager might somehow seek to limit users freedom to determine |
| 20 |
configurations? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives