gmane.linux.debian.devel.announce

Andreas Tille | 10 Nov 10:25

Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news


Hello,

for those who might wander what the term Debian Pure Blends means: the
Custom Debian Distributions now are called Debian Pure Blends - see below
for further information.

Here comes an update what was done since the beginning of this year
which might be interesting for several projects.

Web-Tools
---------

I'm proud to announce a new QA tool for all CDD^W Blends: Overview about
all bugs about Dependencies of our metapackages.  For the impatient here
is a list of these pages:

  Debian Edu:     http://cdd.alioth.debian.org/edu/bugs
  Debian GIS:     http://cdd.alioth.debian.org/gis/bugs
  Debian Jr:      http://cdd.alioth.debian.org/junior/bugs
  Debian Med:     http://debian-med.alioth.debian.org/bugs
  Debian Science: http://cdd.alioth.debian.org/science/bugs

You can read more about the estimation of tasks status of the bugs at
the Blends/BugPages wiki page[1].

Not that new are the so called tasks pages which are listing the packages
in focus of a Blend as well as those projects which are not yet packaged
but might be intersting - so called "prospective packages".  Here are
links to the relevant tasks pages:

(Continue reading)

Stefano Zacchiroli | 10 Nov 11:17

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:26:46AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Renaming Custom Debian Distributions to Debian Pure Blend
> - ---------------------------------------------------------
<snip>
> [3] http://cdd.alioth.debian.org/blends
             ^^^
	      .oO( Have you thought about renaming the Alioth project?
	           CNAMEs do matter. )

... thanks for the initiative!

--

-- 
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è sempre /oo\ All one has to do is hit the right
uno zaino        -- A.Bergonzoni \__/ keys at the right time -- J.S.Bach

Andreas Tille | 10 Nov 12:07

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:26:46AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
>> Renaming Custom Debian Distributions to Debian Pure Blend
>> - ---------------------------------------------------------
> <snip>
>> [3] http://cdd.alioth.debian.org/blends
>             ^^^
> 	      .oO( Have you thought about renaming the Alioth project?
> 	           CNAMEs do matter. )

Yes, I have.  Actually this would be my next step.  I just wanted to
make the renaming process public and then take the next steps.  I also
plan to ask for a new mailing list debian-blends but leaving the list
debian-custom for SimpleCDD issues.

Kind regards

         Andreas.

--

-- 
http://fam-tille.de

Adeodato Simó | 10 Nov 11:40

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

* Andreas Tille [Mon, 10 Nov 2008 10:26:46 +0100]:

> Hello,

Hi Andreas,

> So we finally found a raw consensus for a new name:

>          Debian Pure Blends

What does "raw consensus" mean here? It doesn't seem to be an existing
English idiom...  [Maybe you meant "rough", I don't know.]

Cheers,

-- 
Adeodato Simó                                     dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer                                  adeodato at debian.org

As an adolescent I aspired to lasting fame, I craved factual certainty,
and I thirsted for a meaningful vision of human life -- so I became a
scientist. This is like becoming an archbishop so you can meet girls.
                -- Matt Cartmill

--

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST <at> lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster <at> lists.debian.org

Andreas Tille | 10 Nov 12:09

Re: [IVBB-Spam-Verdacht] Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Adeodato Simó wrote:

> What does "raw consensus" mean here? It doesn't seem to be an existing
> English idiom...  [Maybe you meant "rough", I don't know.]

Yes, sorry - I intended to writh rough (perhaps I should ask co authors
for announcements next time).

In practice the consensus was reached on a ddole poll.

Kind regards

        Andreas.

--

-- 
http://fam-tille.de

Miriam Ruiz | 10 Nov 11:53

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

2008/11/10 Andreas Tille <tillea <at> rki.de>:

> We realised that the old name Custom Debian Distributions just sended
> the wrong message to outsiders: The conclusion that CDDs are something
> else than Debian was to "obvious" if people did not read the relevant
> documentation.  So we finally found a raw consensus for a new name:
>
>        Debian Pure Blends

I'm not exactly sure that I like the new name, to be honest.

Greetings,
Miry

Neil Williams | 10 Nov 12:07

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 11:53 +0100, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> 2008/11/10 Andreas Tille <tillea <at> rki.de>:
> 
> > We realised that the old name Custom Debian Distributions just sended
> > the wrong message to outsiders: The conclusion that CDDs are something
> > else than Debian was to "obvious" if people did not read the relevant
> > documentation.  So we finally found a raw consensus for a new name:
> >
> >        Debian Pure Blends
> 
> I'm not exactly sure that I like the new name, to be honest.

I'm confused by the new name - what are we blending and why confuse
"Pure" and "Blend" in the same name?

Emdebian is a customised Debian too - we will have two flavours soon, a
functionally-identical but smaller Debian based on Squeeze (Emdebian
Grip) and a maximally reduced flavour with functional changes called
Emdebian Crush.

http://www.emdebian.org/emdebian/flavours.html

I was never particularly clear on why "Custom" was a bad name to use.
There is Debian and there are variations of Debian that are customised
for particular roles. Within those variations, flavours and sub-projects
also exist.

I can't see the reasoning for "Pure" "Blends" - doesn't make any sense
to me.

(Continue reading)

Paul Wise | 10 Nov 12:23

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 8:07 PM, Neil Williams <codehelp <at> debian.org> wrote:

> I'm confused by the new name - what are we blending and why confuse
> "Pure" and "Blend" in the same name?
>
> Emdebian is a customised Debian too - we will have two flavours soon, a
> functionally-identical but smaller Debian based on Squeeze (Emdebian
> Grip) and a maximally reduced flavour with functional changes called
> Emdebian Crush.

Emdebian is a more of a Debian-derived distribution (like
Ubuntu/Debian-Edu), Debian Pure Blends (and the old CDDs) are simply a
group of people working within Debian to make Debian itself suitable
for a specific audience.

I do think the new name is much better than the old one, but I agree
that it still isn't perfect.

I think "raw consensus" is roughly equal to "rough consensus".

--

-- 
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Andreas Tille | 10 Nov 12:32

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Neil Williams wrote:

> I was never particularly clear on why "Custom" was a bad name to use.

Actually "distribution" was the worst part of the old name.

Before we have another round of discussing names: Could everybody
who is really interested in the projects please have a look into
the paper[1] and see if they identify with the things described there.

IMHO Emdebian does not really fit into this.  To be a Debian Pure Blend
everything has to be inside (pure) Debian.  We just try to make sure
that people understand this fact.  If you would like to call Emdebian
a "Custom Debian Distribution" this is perfectly fine now because this
term is now not covered any more by a concept we are using which Emdebian
does not really fit into.

Kind regards

        Andreas.

[1] http://cdd.alioth.debian.org/blends/

--

-- 
http://fam-tille.de

Neil Williams | 10 Nov 13:00

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 12:32 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Neil Williams wrote:
> 
> > I was never particularly clear on why "Custom" was a bad name to use.
> 
> Actually "distribution" was the worst part of the old name.

ok

> Before we have another round of discussing names: Could everybody
> who is really interested in the projects please have a look into
> the paper[1] and see if they identify with the things described there.

ack

> IMHO Emdebian does not really fit into this. 

That's why I mentioned the flavours - traditional Emdebian is different,
but that is what will be the Crush flavour. Grip will be straight
Debian, just with smaller packages.

>  To be a Debian Pure Blend
> everything has to be inside (pure) Debian. 

For Emdebian Grip, this does apply (albeit that the scripts themselves
are in development and waiting for the Lenny release before being
uploaded).

>  We just try to make sure
> that people understand this fact.  If you would like to call Emdebian

(Continue reading)

Andreas Tille | 10 Nov 13:28

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Neil Williams wrote:

> I guess what are talking about here is the mirrors. Do all Blends use
> unchanged Debian mirrors?

Yes.  What else would you expect if it says _inside_ Debian?  A Debian
Pure Blend has no separate mirror - THIS is the basic idea of the concept.

> If so, what are Blends blending?

All mixtures are inside the Debian package pool.  Out of these mixtures
we want to fit the taste of a certain user group.

> Emdebian Grip *is* intended to be Debian, just 20% smaller (maybe 30% if

There is no conflict.  There are other things inside Debian than
Debian Pure Blends.  Originally the concept was called "Debian Internal
Projects" [1] and originally the name "Custom Debian Distribution"
was invented to avoid mixing up these user oriented projects from
technical projects (like Emdebian, Debian-Installer, Debian-Live
etc.).  It just turned out that the name CDD immediately caused the
wrong assumption (because of the distribution term) that it is a
distribution which is based on Debian but *different* and our main
focus is on telling people that we are *not* different.

So for you Emdebian was, is and will be a Debian Internal Project which
is listed at the place where it belongs to.  This is what I wanted to
say when I asked for having a look at the doc[2] - the name is choosen
for a concept Emdebian does not really fit into.

(Continue reading)

Daniel Baumann | 10 Nov 14:01

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

Andreas Tille wrote:
> Yes.  What else would you expect if it says _inside_ Debian?  A Debian
> Pure Blend has no separate mirror - THIS is the basic idea of the concept.

so then call them 'Debian Foo' team, since this is what they are and no
different to the various teams we have already (where some of them are
not limited being 100% packaging oriented; e.g. kde team that releases
livecds).

everything else is, imho, useless waste of time explaining and defining
things in terminology that does not matter for 99% of the people here
(ymmv, no offence intended et al. i'm glad and thankful for what you do
in and arround debian, but the naming game isn't one of them).

Regards,
Daniel

--

-- 
Address:        Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist
Email:          daniel.baumann <at> panthera-systems.net
Internet:       http://people.panthera-systems.net/~daniel-baumann/

Andreas Tille | 10 Nov 14:34

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Daniel Baumann wrote:

> so then call them 'Debian Foo' team, since this is what they are and no
> different to the various teams we have already (where some of them are
> not limited being 100% packaging oriented; e.g. kde team that releases
> livecds).

Strangely enough people are so keen on all this naming issues that the
technical part in the beginning of the announcement did not deserved
any comment so far.  This fits perfectly into my observation that the
thread about renaming on the CDD list attracted more people than any
other technical topic before.

Your remark above just ignores that the concept tries to profit from
synergies inside these projects which for instance are reflected in
these tasks or bugs pages, a common technique to build metapackages etc.
The interesting thing in all the business I'm doing since several
years is that all the technical infrastructure which is used in Debian
Med and Debian Edu is instantly available for instance in Debian Science
or potential other projects.  The main idea behind this stuff is that
we are factorising our tools to work for a specific $WORKFIELD$.  This
makes a difference to technical projects like debian-live - and
strangely enough this concept seems to remain a well hidden secret
even if I'm constantly talking about this.

> everything else is, imho, useless waste of time explaining and defining
> things in terminology that does not matter for 99% of the people here

The push in the work of the Debian Science team (which formerly just was
a simple mailing list) might be a clear sign that finding a common

(Continue reading)

Daniel Baumann | 11 Nov 07:43

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

Andreas Tille wrote:
> Your remark above just ignores that the concept tries to profit from
> synergies inside these projects which for instance are reflected in
> these tasks or bugs pages, a common technique to build metapackages etc.

that's not my point; my point is that i don't see why a bunch of teams
in Debian that make use of a common set ot tools/technics/$whatever
should, just because of the fact that they use this common set, be
carrying a special and confusing *different* name than the other teams
terminology does.

or in other words: probably every team is using/sharing some piece of
tools/technics/$whatever with another team or that another team uses too
- overlapping is always good and often happens. so why make some teams
special and name them different?

> If we now would be able to continue *working* for the concept and
> stop spending time criticising the name itself (the time for this is
> over as I tried to explain) or the renaming process in general which
> is definitely a waste of time I would be really happy.

again no offence intendet, but this is why this comes up all the time:
you discuss something on your sub-project internal mailinglist that
nobody else except sub-project members reads, then you guys decide on
something, and present the result on d-d-a. since the topic is far
broader and covers more people than just the already existing
sub-projects, all other people do feel the need to discuss this as
*they* see it the first time (through the d-d-a posting). the excact
same situation happened when you announced 'dish' at debconf.

(Continue reading)

Andreas Tille | 11 Nov 07:57

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

On Tue, 11 Nov 2008, Daniel Baumann wrote:

> to avoid such things, especially with defining naming terminology for
> things that covers such broad aspects of debian, a poll on your
> sub-project only mailinglists is probably not enough, and imho at least
> one of either d-devel or d-project should be CC'ed too to get peoples
> awareness *in the first place* and right at the beginning of the
> decission making, and not at the end.

Ahh, OK - got the point.  I do not assume that another renaming process
will be done any time soon - but if something else happens that might
interest more people I might consider CCing debian-{devel,project}.  I
just hesitated to CC more than 6 lists (these were clearly related) and
I'm afraid that other people would have considered this kind of mails
as spam, but perhaps it makes sense to reach even more people.

Kind regards

        Andreas.

--

-- 
http://fam-tille.de

Neil Williams | 10 Nov 14:51

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 13:28 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Neil Williams wrote:
> 
> > I guess what are talking about here is the mirrors. Do all Blends use
> > unchanged Debian mirrors?
> 
> Yes.  What else would you expect if it says _inside_ Debian?  A Debian
> Pure Blend has no separate mirror - THIS is the basic idea of the concept.

That is where I found "Blends" confusing - it conjures up images of
mixing two different things into one. What you are describing is (to me)
more filtering or remixing, not blending. Maybe it's my professional
bias - I'm used to doing admixtures, blends, compounding and formulation
and the terms have quite specific (pharmaceutical) meanings.

A + B = C (blending A with B to make a new, bigger, C)

(Think blending chocolate into cake mix to get a chocolate cake or
blending a strawberry flavour into a cough mixture. What you get has a
larger volume/mass.)

What Blends is describing is actually something that is not possible
with "real-world" blending - substituting a strawberry flavour for a
raspberry flavour in an existing product - quite possibly reducing the
total volume/mass of the final product.

It works because the "product" (Debian) is itself a mixture that has
both flavours available and the blending happens *before* the real-world
product (the installation) exists:

(Continue reading)

Charles Plessy | 10 Nov 16:53

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

Le Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 01:51:05PM +0000, Neil Williams a écrit :
> That is where I found "Blends" confusing - it conjures up images of
> mixing two different things into one.

This tempts me a lot to mix stable and backports.debian.org (once it exists) in
our shiny new blender :)

By the way, I really want to thank Andreas for his courage to manage the
renaming of the CDD concept.

Have a nice day,

-- 
Charles Plessy
Debian Med packaging team,
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan

--

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST <at> lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster <at> lists.debian.org

Steffen Moeller | 12 Nov 12:09

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

Neil Williams wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 13:28 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Neil Williams wrote:
>>
>>> I guess what are talking about here is the mirrors. Do all Blends use
>>> unchanged Debian mirrors?
>> Yes.  What else would you expect if it says _inside_ Debian?  A Debian
>> Pure Blend has no separate mirror - THIS is the basic idea of the concept.
> 
> That is where I found "Blends" confusing - it conjures up images of
> mixing two different things into one. What you are describing is (to me)
> more filtering or remixing, not blending. Maybe it's my professional
> bias - I'm used to doing admixtures, blends, compounding and formulation
> and the terms have quite specific (pharmaceutical) meanings.
> 
> A + B = C (blending A with B to make a new, bigger, C)
> 
> (Think blending chocolate into cake mix to get a chocolate cake or
> blending a strawberry flavour into a cough mixture. What you get has a
> larger volume/mass.)
> 
> What Blends is describing is actually something that is not possible
> with "real-world" blending - substituting a strawberry flavour for a
> raspberry flavour in an existing product - quite possibly reducing the
> total volume/mass of the final product.
> 
> It works because the "product" (Debian) is itself a mixture that has
> both flavours available and the blending happens *before* the real-world
> product (the installation) exists:
>

(Continue reading)

Andreas Tille | 10 Nov 12:15

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Miriam Ruiz wrote:

>> We realised that the old name Custom Debian Distributions just sended
>> the wrong message to outsiders: The conclusion that CDDs are something
>> else than Debian was to "obvious" if people did not read the relevant
>> documentation.  So we finally found a raw consensus for a new name:
>>
>>        Debian Pure Blends
>
> I'm not exactly sure that I like the new name, to be honest.

Well, the renaming was announced on debian-custom list and all lists
of existing CDDs (also for instance on Debian Junior list[1]).  And,
yes, you are not the only one who is not really happy, but this name
has won the poll and I also asked[2] whether "people insist on a
condorset voting".  So there was a chance to take some influence for
people who are involved.

Kind regards

         Andreas.

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-jr/2008/09/msg00003.html
[2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-custom/2008/10/msg00002.html

--

-- 
http://fam-tille.de

Miriam Ruiz | 10 Nov 15:28

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

2008/11/10 Andreas Tille <tillea <at> rki.de>:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
>
>> I'm not exactly sure that I like the new name, to be honest.
>
> Well, the renaming was announced on debian-custom list and all lists
> of existing CDDs (also for instance on Debian Junior list[1]).  And,
> yes, you are not the only one who is not really happy, but this name
> has won the poll and I also asked[2] whether "people insist on a
> condorset voting".  So there was a chance to take some influence for
> people who are involved.

I know, I've been extremelly busy these last weeks and I couldn't join
the discussion. Please don't take my comment as an active opposition
to that name, it is not. In fact it doesn't bother me too much how we
call them, but it's the concept I'm interested in. All I was saying is
that I don't particurally like the game, but if it has been voted and
the rest of the people likes it, I can live with it :)

Greetings,
Miry

Miriam Ruiz | 10 Nov 15:33

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

2008/11/10 Miriam Ruiz <miriam <at> debian.org>:

> that I don't particurally like the game, but if it has been voted and

s/game/name/

Sorry,
Miry

Brian May | 11 Nov 00:10

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> I'm not exactly sure that I like the new name, to be honest.
>   
I saw the name and initially thought it was related to blender.

http://www.blender.org/

Brian May

The Fungi | 12 Nov 20:39

Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news

On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 10:10:37AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> I saw the name and initially thought it was related to blender.
[...]

It struck me as a coffee reference, since the term often gets used
to describe blends of coffee beans from the same region. Then again,
perhaps I drink too much coffee...
--

-- 
{ IRL(Jeremy_Stanley); PGP(9E8DFF2E4F5995F8FEADDC5829ABF7441FB84657);
SMTP(fungi <at> yuggoth.org); IRC(fungi <at> irc.yuggoth.org#ccl); ICQ(114362511);
AIM(dreadazathoth); YAHOO(crawlingchaoslabs); FINGER(fungi <at> yuggoth.org);
MUD(fungi <at> katarsis.mudpy.org:6669); WWW(http://fungi.yuggoth.org/); }

Return

Return to gmane.linux.debian.devel.announce.

Advertisement

Search Archive

Language

Change language

Options

Current view: Threads only / Showing only 20 lines / Not hiding cited text.
Change to All messages, whole messages, or hide cited text.

Post a message
NNTP Newsgroup
Classic Gmane web interface
XML

XML

RSS Feed
List Information

About Gmane