My resignation

Ken Moffat ken at kenmoffat.uklinux.net
Thu Jul 15 06:26:14 PDT 2004


On Thu, 15 Jul 2004, Matthias B. wrote:

>
> If we had 2 branches, one with a clear focus towards maximum functionality
> and progress and one with a clear focus towards education, then we would
> not be having this conflict. The functionality branch would comprise
> unstable and testing, oriented towards progress and new development,
> accepting complexities such as udev, hotplug and other useful stuff. The
> goal would be to give people instructions for building their own Linux
> distro that can compete with other distros. Educational content would be
> secondary and targeted at advanced users who want to understand what
> they're doing, what's the rationale behind the instructions but don't need
> textbook style education.
>
> The educational branch on the other hand would be what is stable now, but
> stripped down even further (e.g. no networking, possibly not even
> SysVinit), with no need to produce a useful, complete system with
> up-to-date packages. The educational branch would deal with udev, hotplug,
> networking, sophisticated SysVinit setups,... in Appendixes that are
> something like educationally enhanced super-hints. It would be like a
> course with several modules. The basic module would tell you how a Linux
> system works at a simple example that leaves out all the complex stuff.
> Additional modules build on this.
>

 Now you're getting me worried :)  I don't fit into _either_ of these
branches.  I'm a functional educationalist, who doesn't like to bleed in
more than one area at a time!

 Examples - at the moment I'm still trying to build a better desktop on
an early belfs base - there are known problems with the base, but my
desktop issues are down to BLFS runtime dependency and build-order
issues.  I can't take the pain of rebuilding the base system there until
I've worked out my best _compromise_ for the desktop.

 Also, I'm trying to port the 2.6 kernel to my ppc's platform (the 2.4
minimum base work was already done).  Yes, I can see all the wonders of
sysfs, udev, etc and hopefully I'll be playing with them one day, but
for the moment I need a _stable_ environment there so I can concentrate
on the kernel errors.  But, stable has to mean maximum functionality.

 The tendency on lfs-dev is to regard everything as black and white.
That's a fine position for Linus to take in keeping the kernel doing the
right thing.  It's a much less appropriate view in many other places.

 Oh, and if we had the educational | functional split, the functional
branch would still be having many of the arguments we've seen recently.

Ken
-- 
 das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list