Userlinux and Progeny

[Matt Zimmerman]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2004 at 07:53:38PM -0300, F?bio Mendes wrote:

> Wouldn't it be very logical if Ubuntu would share (at binary level) the
> Base Seed packages and even the d-i sources with Userlinux? And the same
> with Progeny's componets linux? This way bugs could be tracked and
> resolved more quickly in both lands and specially hardware detection
> issues would have a faster treatment.

Ubuntu is an open source project, and our so our code is shared with
everyone else, but it doesn't make much sense to share binaries, since those
projects (like Ubuntu) will make changes to customise their distribution.

> This would also set a great de facto standard for modern debian based
> distros and force debian structure to absorve most of
> Ubuntu/Progeny/Userlinux achievements and decisions faster (like gnome 2.8
> debs or using X.org instead of XFree86, for example).

Trying to force Debian to do anything, or to do anything faster, has never
been a successful approach. :-)

--
- mdz

[Fábio Mendes]

Wouldn't it be very logical if Ubuntu would share (at binary level) the
Base Seed packages and even the d-i sources with Userlinux? And the same
with Progeny's componets linux? This way bugs could be tracked and
resolved more quickly in both lands and specially hardware detection
issues would have a faster treatment. This would also set a great de
facto standard for modern debian based distros and force debian
structure to absorve most of Ubuntu/Progeny/Userlinux achievements and
decisions faster (like gnome 2.8 debs or using X.org instead of XFree86,
for example). Do you guys think it's technically feasible for the next
(pre)release of all those distros? (of course, assuming that will be
interest from all parts...) Was there any discussion with Bruce Perens
or Ian Murdock on the subject? If all players succeed in their goals,
the final product will have little user level difference being it
Ubuntu, Progeny Componets and Userlinux and there's a lot of overlap in
their objectives, so I wonder if it'll make sense to have a common
development structure.

Thanks,
-Fabio