[Lincs] Distro - Clarifying some points

Sun Apr 1 13:36:58 BST 2007

> -----Original Message-----
> From: lincs-bounces at mailman.lug.org.uk
> [mailto:lincs-bounces at mailman.lug.org.uk] On Behalf Of James Taylor
> Sent: 01 April 2007 00:22
> To: Lincolnshire Linux User Group
> Subject: [Lincs] Distro - Clarifying some points
> 
> 
> Can we take a second to discuss the actual requirments as
> this is getting 
> into a slag fest of favorite distos without it seems, 
> actually applying any 
> logic or real discussion on the point. Now, I've made some 
> assumptions here, 
> so if you disagree with any of the questions, with any of the 
> answers or 
> want to provide better ones then please go ahead without 
> biting my head 
> off...

Agreed, slagging sucks (and not in a good way).

> 
> 1) Whats the genaral point?
> To get a bootable cd with as much software on to get people
> using Linux. The 
> cd should let them use Linux whilst not destorying their windows 
> installation, but allow them to install it from the CD 
> [without a network 
> connection].

Sounds OK. I mean the bit about not destroying other OSs.

> 
> 2) What people?
> People who arn't nessicairly computer literate, people who
> maybe dont know 
> what an OS is.

I would question whether computer illerates are even interested in running
Linux. Surely, the target market is people who've used/are using windows or
Mac [substitute any other non-Linux OS] and are aware/interested in giving
Linux a go, regardless of their level of technical expertise. I just can't
see computer illiterates being interested.

> 
> 3) Limitations because of the above?
> Well, you've got to make it bootable and theres technical
> tricks that let 
> you mount compressed drives, but you're looking at playing 
> with about 3 gig 
> of virtual space on the 700 Mb Cd (I just made that up, cause I cant 
> remember, and I'm not an expert on the compression mounting 
> thing, nor know 
> how much space has to be on the uncompressed partition)

Now, I'm going to stick my neck out even further...

Is having a single distro produced by LLUG, allbeit all singing/all dancing
the way to go?

What I would find helpful is having experts on hand to guide newbies like me
in the distros that I'm interested in. For example, I was interested a while
back in installing Gentoo. An associate, who runs his own web servers was
singing the praises of gentoo because it was more secure than other distros
because of fewer bells and whistles and being able to only install the
minimum to run a web server, and he said he'd benchmarked it regarding speed
and said it was quicker.

Time precluded me from going ahead.

The next distro I became interested in was Ubuntu 6.10 but ran into hardware
compatibility issues (Dell laptop).

However, if such a policy of having experts on hand in individual distros is
a possiblity, then all this childish "points scoring" would have to stop. As
adults I'm sure we all recognise different distros have different pros and
cons.

Also, if this type of regime were possible/desirable would it be possible to
use the existing forum to add categories for each distro?

If so, could the volunteer expert be given authority to moderate their own
distro category.

The benefits, as I see it, are that newbies could have a look through the
different distro categories and ask questions before deciding which distro
they will try first. And then have an ongoing source of reference/support.

I'll stop here, because the rest assumes an LLUG distro.

All the above are suggestions from a newbie, and if my suggestions are not
workable I'd be interested to know why not. On the other hand, it would be
good to see the essence embraced if it is a feasible proposition.

Another thought, could both solutions be an option to see which proves more
popular?

Richard

> 
> 4) Package Management.
> There MUST be a package manager, (I havn't seen anyone
> pushing slackware as 
> a base system). This package manager allows the installation of basic 
> pre-configured binarys and settings files AND source files for custom 
> compilation. Custom packages should be easy to create to 
> maintain the system 
> integrety (for removal of any file/package)
> 
> 5) Package Updating
> The computers will pull from a customisable list of servers
> the contents of 
> updated packages for installing, through the use of various 
> tools both 
> graphical and normal.
> 
> 6) Default Package Repositorys
> Supposing that we rebadge [distoX]. Are we suggesting that
> the [distoX 
> default servers] should be used, or are we going to have 
> LincsDisto source 
> servers (and :. a requirmenet for Lincs members to be responsible for 
> package maintainance of this distribution (and generic 
> support for people 
> who will want to use both our sources and other compatible sources). 
> (Obviously the latter is nearly inconcevable amount of work, 
> but if the 
> former, how does the Linc's default settings get applied to 
> these installs?)
> 
> 7) Official managment of release
> Who is responsible for the official managment of releases?
> How will the 
> documentation of releases work? Is there going to be a 
> checking system, by 
> that I mean very much committe level for which disputes or 
> arguments can be 
> put to? (This can be very simple through the use of something 
> like UK Voting 
> or similar)
> 
> 8) Contributors
> Exactly how will contributing to the system work?  (The
> answer to this 
> question again depends on various answers above).
> 
> 9) Documentation
> Is there an associated documentation project / how is this
> going to work? 
> (the answer of this question depends on various answers from above)
> 
> 10) Legal bumpf
> Are lincs covered legally for this release breaking
> computers. Supposing 
> there is a mistake in the instructions to install software, 
> which causes 
> users to wipe their drives, under any situations, are Lincs 
> members/distribution maintainers/documentors at risk from 
> being sued. (Has 
> legal advice (and by that I mean professional legal advice eg fsf or 
> professional body) been sought on this topic)
> 
> 11) Install to disk What options does the disto have for pernament
> installation?
> The disto should allow a range of installations, including 
> just using a 
> folder on the fat32 as well as full blwon reinstall. There 
> should be options 
> to install base system without any extra packages, as well as 
> standard user 
> install.
> 
> 12) What license is the disto under?
> hahahah im not going to try to answer that one. I will get it wrong
> (Presumably more then one disto)
> 
> ---
> Ok, now the point of that was to actually allow discussion
> about individual 
> disto's benifits. For starters, I would like to express 
> concern about the 
> continued pointing out of size of the install - the argument 
> that Gentoo's 
> size benefit would give more disk space is almost immaterial as any 
> distribution gives custom-compile-from-source options that 
> would give the 
> same output, the question should now be about what package 
> mangers give you, 
> the pros and the cons of ease of continual use.
> 
> JT
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lincs mailing list
> Lincs at mailman.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/lincs
> 
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.24/741 - Release 
> Date: 31/03/2007 20:54
> 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.24/741 - Release Date: 31/03/2007
20:54