FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-09-2008, 11:57 PM
Patrice Dumas
 
Default Linux is not about choice

On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 07:38:42PM -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 01:19 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > It isn't that simple. Do we also want community handle on fedora or
> > not? I really like redhat leadership and innovations, but I don't want
> > to be a puppet either. If people from the community with specific needs
> > and wants are to be accepted in fedora, it means that radical simplicity
> > is not possible.
>
> Oh nice. Now you're playing the "RH vs. community" card. Priceless. News
> flash: this is _not_ about RH vs. the community. It's about realizing
> that software development is _hard_. It's about realizing that throwing

It is not exactly "RH vs. community". I just want to make sure that
things like xdm, initng, fluxbox, compat packages, xpdf or a non linux
kernel (all are things that are duplicates of other packages) are still
welcomed in fedora. After all it is not necessarily an issue if not, but
this should be stated explicitely.

My personal understanding of fedora was that a package was accepted as
long as it was free software, usable in fedora, and decently integrated.
Isn't it still the case?

In fact there are already guidelines and FESCo rulings that in my opinion
went in that direction (precisely, and if I recall well, the fnord and
another package of Enrico that were linked statically against uclibc,
and even he demonstrated that there was a performance gain and no
security issue they were knocked down). I think that it was a wrong
decision, but if it is for corner case it is different than if it
becomes the rule.

--
Pat

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-10-2008, 12:14 AM
David Zeuthen
 
Default Linux is not about choice

On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 01:57 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> My personal understanding of fedora was that a package was accepted as
> long as it was free software, usable in fedora, and decently integrated.
> Isn't it still the case?

Sure, live free or die etc. But you cannot expect maintainers of core
packages to simply bend over just because you think it's l33t to e.g.
have a non Linux kernel. Moreover, I'm pretty sure, by just reading your
mails, that you don't realize what using a non Linux kernel even
entails.

> In fact there are already guidelines and FESCo rulings that in my opinion
> went in that direction (precisely, and if I recall well, the fnord and
> another package of Enrico that were linked statically against uclibc,
> and even he demonstrated that there was a performance gain and no
> security issue they were knocked down). I think that it was a wrong
> decision, but if it is for corner case it is different than if it
> becomes the rule.

Ooo.. here's the "it's in the guidelines so do as I say" card. Annoying.

Seriously. People. What the hell happened to simplicity and building a
free OS for the world that just works? Is the state of Fedora really in
such a bad shape that people think it's necessary have craptastic
options like "what kernel would you like today?". Seriously, things like
that is just masturbation and we in Fedora should be above that. I feel
that people wanting this are treating Fedora like it's a playground for
their Toy OS ideas. Playing classic cards like "RH vs. community" and
"this or that committee says so" to justify their "ideas". It's
seriously tiring. Is this what Fedora is becoming? Because if it is,
I'll find something else to spend my time on.

David


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-10-2008, 12:21 AM
"Christopher Brown"
 
Default Linux is not about choice

On 10/01/2008, Patrice Dumas <pertusus@free.fr> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 07:38:42PM -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 01:19 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > > It isn't that simple. Do we also want community handle on fedora or
> > > not? I really like redhat leadership and innovations, but I don't want
> > > to be a puppet either. If people from the community with specific needs
> > > and wants are to be accepted in fedora, it means that radical simplicity
> > > is not possible.
> >
> > Oh nice. Now you're playing the "RH vs. community" card. Priceless. News
> > flash: this is _not_ about RH vs. the community. It's about realizing
> > that software development is _hard_. It's about realizing that throwing
>
> It is not exactly "RH vs. community". I just want to make sure that
> things like xdm, initng, fluxbox, compat packages, xpdf or a non linux
> kernel (all are things that are duplicates of other packages) are still
> welcomed in fedora. After all it is not necessarily an issue if not, but
> this should be stated explicitely.
>
> My personal understanding of fedora was that a package was accepted as
> long as it was free software, usable in fedora, and decently integrated.
> Isn't it still the case?

Of course but at some point, particularly with something such as
separate subsystem stacks in the kernel, someone has to make a
technical choice. In this instance JuJu was enabled in 7+ with the
intention to work with the maintainers to resolve issues as they
arose. Firewire in Linux is a mess but it is improving, thanks largely
to the JuJu team and if I may say, the inclusion of said stack in
Fedora. One of the maintainers is extremely active on the Fedora
bugzilla.

So when those qualified to do so make that choice, they are merely set
as defaults. If you want the old firewire stack there are third party
repos rolling kernels with it included. If you want xpdf over evince
then you can have that as well. Some software such as fluxbox caters
for smaller markets so it won't ever be default but as long as it
works for what it does it will be there.

That is what a distribution is essentially - a set of software
packages deemed to be the best in class. It won't suit everyone but it
should suit most. 80/20 rule and all that.

Cheers

--
Christopher Brown

http://www.chruz.com

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-10-2008, 12:34 AM
"Christopher Brown"
 
Default Linux is not about choice

On 10/01/2008, David Zeuthen <david@fubar.dk> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 01:57 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > My personal understanding of fedora was that a package was accepted as
> > long as it was free software, usable in fedora, and decently integrated.
> > Isn't it still the case?
>
> Sure, live free or die etc. But you cannot expect maintainers of core
> packages to simply bend over just because you think it's l33t to e.g.
> have a non Linux kernel. Moreover, I'm pretty sure, by just reading your
> mails, that you don't realize what using a non Linux kernel even
> entails.
>
> > In fact there are already guidelines and FESCo rulings that in my opinion
> > went in that direction (precisely, and if I recall well, the fnord and
> > another package of Enrico that were linked statically against uclibc,
> > and even he demonstrated that there was a performance gain and no
> > security issue they were knocked down). I think that it was a wrong
> > decision, but if it is for corner case it is different than if it
> > becomes the rule.
>
> Ooo.. here's the "it's in the guidelines so do as I say" card. Annoying.
>
> Seriously. People. What the hell happened to simplicity and building a
> free OS for the world that just works? Is the state of Fedora really in
> such a bad shape that people think it's necessary have craptastic
> options like "what kernel would you like today?". Seriously, things like
> that is just masturbation and we in Fedora should be above that. I feel
> that people wanting this are treating Fedora like it's a playground for
> their Toy OS ideas. Playing classic cards like "RH vs. community" and
> "this or that committee says so" to justify their "ideas". It's
> seriously tiring. Is this what Fedora is becoming? Because if it is,
> I'll find something else to spend my time on.

Not sure how arguing over kernel builds is akin to wanking but really
this is a "My $DEVICE wont work under Linux" thread that should have
started as a bz entry and has gotten out of hand so don't get too
disheartened.

--
Christopher Brown

http://www.chruz.com

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-10-2008, 12:37 AM
David Zeuthen
 
Default Linux is not about choice

On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 01:34 +0000, Christopher Brown wrote:
> Not sure how arguing over kernel builds is akin to wanking but really
> this is a "My $DEVICE wont work under Linux" thread that should have
> started as a bz entry and has gotten out of hand so don't get too
> disheartened.

Maybe it wasn't clear but with "what kernel would you like today" I
meant things like "do you want a FreeBSD or Linux" kernel. The very idea
of supporting that kind of thing in Fedora is, at least from my neck of
the woods, pure crack.

David


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-10-2008, 12:50 AM
Andrew Farris
 
Default Linux is not about choice

Christopher Brown wrote:

On 10/01/2008, Patrice Dumas <pertusus@free.fr> wrote:

On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 07:38:42PM -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:

On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 01:19 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:

It isn't that simple. Do we also want community handle on fedora or
not? I really like redhat leadership and innovations, but I don't want
to be a puppet either. If people from the community with specific needs
and wants are to be accepted in fedora, it means that radical simplicity
is not possible.

Oh nice. Now you're playing the "RH vs. community" card. Priceless. News
flash: this is _not_ about RH vs. the community. It's about realizing
that software development is _hard_. It's about realizing that throwing

It is not exactly "RH vs. community". I just want to make sure that
things like xdm, initng, fluxbox, compat packages, xpdf or a non linux
kernel (all are things that are duplicates of other packages) are still
welcomed in fedora. After all it is not necessarily an issue if not, but
this should be stated explicitely.

My personal understanding of fedora was that a package was accepted as
long as it was free software, usable in fedora, and decently integrated.
Isn't it still the case?


Of course but at some point, particularly with something such as
separate subsystem stacks in the kernel, someone has to make a
technical choice. In this instance JuJu was enabled in 7+ with the
intention to work with the maintainers to resolve issues as they
arose. Firewire in Linux is a mess but it is improving, thanks largely
to the JuJu team and if I may say, the inclusion of said stack in
Fedora. One of the maintainers is extremely active on the Fedora
bugzilla.


I think here (Christopher says it well) is the most salient point on 'is it
welcome or not'... the problem that started the thread (JuJu new vs old stack)
was simply the primary maintainer choosing to go with new, and if anyone (other
than that maintainer who chose not to) had provided the appropriate
compatibility/switching/coexistence patches to have both available I am pretty
certain that it could have and would have been done. I mean look at the history
and how long the simple mta switcher app survives because someone provided it
when other options than sendmail were available.


So Patrice I think the answer is and always will be 'its welcome' but the issue
is who will do it. When that choice (or any other hard choice of innovation vs
current working compatibility) is made it is up to those who need current
compatibility to help keep it available. As others have said in the thread to
plan on the primary maintainers handling it in a 'keep everything forever'
fashion is guaranteed to be madness and a big failure.


--
Andrew Farris <lordmorgul@gmail.com> <ajfarris@gmail.com>
gpg 0xC99B1DF3 fingerprint CDEC 6FAD BA27 40DF 707E A2E0 F0F6 E622 C99B 1DF3
No one now has, and no one will ever again get, the big picture. - Daniel Geer
---- ----

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-10-2008, 01:54 AM
Rahul Sundaram
 
Default Linux is not about choice

Les Mikesell wrote:
Can we have OpenSolaris (with zfs) too? I was going to point out that
Linux wasn't about choice but about providing a free and compatible
alternative to Unix. But this would complete the circle...


You can have a lot of things if you step up to contribute. Wishlists are
already overflowing.


Rahul

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-10-2008, 03:59 AM
Bill Nottingham
 
Default Linux is not about choice

Thorsten Leemhuis (fedora@leemhuis.info) said:
> > Right now DRI/DRM breaks VT switch and suspend on my laptop. Should we
> > ship two Intel drivers and two kernels until this is resolved? [...]
>
> Bugs in a updated package are something totally different (everyone
> tries to avoid them, but they happen, so we have to live with them) then
> switching to a new completely firewire stack that doesn't support
> everything yet what the old stack did.

By this logic, we should have enabled both old IDE and libata and
let the users choose between them at runtime as well.

The way to have a reliable core system is to pick a single supported
interface and fix it. As far as I can tell, the firewire stack now
works, except for an issue with one hardware chipset. While that is
not good for users who have that chipset, it's certainly about par
for the course with many other drivers we have, and I don't see why
that should mean that the whole thing should be switched out.

Bill

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-10-2008, 08:17 AM
Patrice Dumas
 
Default Linux is not about choice

On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 08:14:02PM -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 01:57 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > My personal understanding of fedora was that a package was accepted as
> > long as it was free software, usable in fedora, and decently integrated.
> > Isn't it still the case?
>
> Sure, live free or die etc. But you cannot expect maintainers of core
> packages to simply bend over just because you think it's l33t to e.g.

What do you mean exactly by 'bend over'? I don't expect maintainers of
any package (what is a core package?) to do anything, but I don't expect
them to block or cause problem to somebody wanting to add a new kernel
to fedora (as long as that new kernel addition is done in a sound
technical way).

> have a non Linux kernel. Moreover, I'm pretty sure, by just reading your
> mails, that you don't realize what using a non Linux kernel even
> entails.

Indeed. This was an extreme example to avoid getting in the technical
argument, but keep talking on the organisational issues.

> > In fact there are already guidelines and FESCo rulings that in my opinion
> > went in that direction (precisely, and if I recall well, the fnord and
> > another package of Enrico that were linked statically against uclibc,
> > and even he demonstrated that there was a performance gain and no
> > security issue they were knocked down). I think that it was a wrong
> > decision, but if it is for corner case it is different than if it
> > becomes the rule.
>
> Ooo.. here's the "it's in the guidelines so do as I say" card. Annoying.

Hum, maybe I wasn't clear, but I actually meant that FESCo should have
left Enrico link statically his packages. So I said the reverse...

> Seriously. People. What the hell happened to simplicity and building a
> free OS for the world that just works? Is the state of Fedora really in
> such a bad shape that people think it's necessary have craptastic
> options like "what kernel would you like today?". Seriously, things like
> that is just masturbation and we in Fedora should be above that.

It is not masturbation, it is about what is acceptable or not in fedora,
from the point of view of a contributor. It is absolutely not related
with the shape of fedora.

> I feel
> that people wanting this are treating Fedora like it's a playground for
> their Toy OS ideas.

You shouldn't make such assumptions. There are many reasons to have
diversity and freedom to add anything. I could tell mine, but I don't
think it is relevant. Point is do we allow any package to go in, be it
for fedora contributors to use fedora as 'a playground for their Toy OS
ideas' or for any other reason.

> Playing classic cards like "RH vs. community" and
> "this or that committee says so" to justify their "ideas". It's
> seriously tiring. Is this what Fedora is becoming? Because if it is,
> I'll find something else to spend my time on.

Forget the "RH vs. community" stuff, rereading my mail I indeed said
that but it was a mistake, and it isn't the issue here. It is mainstream
fedora (a simple fedora that just works) versus freedom to add anything
that is free software and works (even if not very well integrated).

--
Pat

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-10-2008, 09:54 AM
Matej Cepl
 
Default Linux is not about choice

On 2008-01-10, 00:08 GMT, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Can we have OpenSolaris (with zfs) too? I was going to point
> out that Linux wasn't about choice but about providing a free
> and compatible alternative to Unix. But this would complete
> the circle...

I would put my hope into http://oss.oracle.com/projects/btrfs/
rather than into port of ZFS on Linux. Yes, it is still alpha,
and yes Oracle could screw it up somehow (I don't exepct it,
though), but creating our own implementation of the stuff seems
like The Linux Way (rather than whinning that Sun didn't give us
the candy).

Matej

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:08 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org