On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 10:42 -0500, Lamar Owen wrote: > On Thursday 17 January 2008, Les Mikesell wrote: > > Exactly, and that just doesn't happen. Is it just that I know more > > about the RPM situation or is this better organized over in the .deb world? > > Ubuntu, to pick one debian derivative, solves this by basically not having any > third party repositories. The main repo is so large, and so all-inclusive, > that a third party repo isn't terribly useful. > This is one case where openness of the process was more important than the > openness of the source code for the user experience, IMO. And this is one > case where Fedora is late to a very important party, unfortunately. ACK, but I'd go one step further. One of the positive aspects about Debian, is it having developed a "culture of openness" and a culture of "community" (On the negative side this occasionally has derailed into religious fanatism). IMHO, this doesn't apply to Fedora. Its history and ongoing close relationship to the commercial world still reflects all over it and doesn't always harmonize well. > The only reason I have ever had for thinking about switching from Fedora to a > Debian-based system was the smooth repository with a massive number of > packages. I have stuck with Fedora. I don't regret that decision. (For all > the integrated repository goodness, Ubuntu has its own serious problems that > prevent me from switching; I'll stick with the demon I know). The same situation I am in ;) > And I love the new open process, even with the CLA needed. Fedora is getting > there; just wish it had been there in 1999, that's all. Those who come too late will be punished by fate ;) Ralf
