[Poll] Should Trisquel 9 be Based on Debian?

46 replies [Last post]
ylevental

I am a member!

Offline
Joined: 09/30/2017

Answer at https://www.poll-maker.com/poll1922291xBcBf4686-51

When I have recorded enough responses, I will email to the main developers

Reason to support Debian: Trisquel could be based on Jesse (main branch only). This uses the debian Kernel which already divides free from non-free firmware, plus official backports (main branch only) which will provide a newer kernel.
This could speed up new releases (or a rolling release) a lot because Trisquel will have to provide only helpers for packages such as Firefox or Icedeove in order to avoid non-free adds-on suggested.

calher
Offline
Joined: 06/19/2015

This poll requires proprietary software in the form of JavaScript in the web browser, so I did not run it.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/javascript-trap.html

Trisquel should stay on Ubuntu LTS. If you want Debian, go help gNewSense. Also, Jessie is OLD STABLE. If you're going to base it off anything, go with Stretch STABLE.

ylevental

I am a member!

Offline
Joined: 09/30/2017

I heard gNewSense is dead though. And what would be a good polling website then? I agree with you about the Debian version though.

Mangy Dog

I am a member!

I am a translator!

Offline
Joined: 03/15/2015

You could try asking David (Trisquel's Website adminstator) to activate a Drupal module (Trisquel.info is run on Drupal)
https://www.drupal.org/project/webform
(Webform is the module for making forms and surveys in Drupal).

This is based on Webform but in French
https://www.framaforms.org/

Trisquel initial quest was to be based on the most popular GNU/Linux distritubion aka Ubuntu.
You can contact gNewSense too, on the dev-list for more info of a Debian based Libre OS.

nickylodeon
Offline
Joined: 07/22/2017

You can use one provided by Disroot ;) [shine]

gd_scania
Offline
Joined: 09/13/2017

I instead want to make an gNewSense derivative instead of helping them, an another dead GNU system, Blag, I also need to derive it to my new sources based rolling GNU system (Parabola is binaries based rolling GNU system), Blag was rpm-based and rpm sources are as sources based as Gentoo (Ututo, its derivative, was also an GNU system).

calher
Offline
Joined: 06/19/2015

Stop fragmenting labor. What you are doing is harmful and helps nobody. Help an existing project or don't help at all. Your little pet project is a waste of labor, and you should be ashamed.

strypey
Offline
Joined: 05/14/2015

Keep your hair on Calher. There may be good reasons someone wants to start a new project rather than join an existing one. A friendly suggestion to help with an existing distro is fine. But it's just mean to tell people their efforts to help free software are "harmful and helps nobody", or "a waste of labor", and nobody should ever, *ever*, be told to "be ashamed" for any kind of work on free software.

calher
Offline
Joined: 06/19/2015

I may have said it in a mean way, but I have been seeing so much fragmentation lately that nobody is getting any work done.

ADFENO
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2012

Let's keep it all together in the same project people! :)

csh [at] bluehome [dot] net writes:

> I may have said it in a mean way, but I have been seeing so much
> fragmentation lately that nobody is getting any work done.

IrishUSA
Offline
Joined: 12/03/2016

As the FSF says:

https://www.gnu.org/distros/

"[...] if you want to make an effective contribution to free GNU/Linux distributions, we suggest that you join the development of an existing free distro rather that starting a new free distro."

onpon4
Offline
Joined: 05/30/2012

Most of Ubuntu's proprietary software is separated out, too. I don't see switching to a Debian base as advantageous. Heck, I personally would have very little reason to use Trisquel if it were based on Debian.

vpincini
Offline
Joined: 11/13/2014

Here a couple of reason why switching to Debian will be advantageus:
- Ubuntu is based on Debian Unstable and it obviously more bloted than its source
- Debian division beetwenn free and non-free is clean and accurate in repos and packages, the one you are claiming for Ubuntu is, to be kind, obscure
- Ubuntu is ruled by a company and companies looks for profits not freedom, Debian is not
- Ubuntu in the past has done some creepy choices about privacy of users: does "Amazon search" ring a bell?
- Debian (stable and testing suites) are much more stable and less "resource hungry" of Ubuntu anytime anywhere at any condition
- Debian LTS IS much more stable and less "resource hungry" of Ubuntu LST anytime anywhere at any condition

In my opinion Debian is definetively a better choice from a technical and a "freedom care" points of view.

onpon4
Offline
Joined: 05/30/2012

> Ubuntu is based on Debian Unstable and it obviously more bloted than its source

That doesn't follow.

> Debian division beetwenn free and non-free is clean and accurate in repos and packages, the one you are claiming for Ubuntu is, to be kind, obscure

There are really not that many packages incorrectly considered to be "free" in Ubuntu. Linux and Ubuntu fonts are the specific examples that come to mind. They don't modify Firefox, but neither does Debian. So it's really not terribly significant.

> Ubuntu is ruled by a company and companies looks for profits not freedom, Debian is not

Isn't that just ever more of a reason to make a libre distro based on Ubuntu? So that people use the libre version instead?

> Ubuntu in the past has done some creepy choices about privacy of users: does "Amazon search" ring a bell?

That never even affected Trisquel because Trisquel didn't use Unity. And it's not like it's just going to happen without being found out. The response was swift last time, coming long before Trisquel even had a chance to need to worry about it.

> Debian (stable and testing suites) are much more stable and less "resource hungry" of Ubuntu anytime anywhere at any condition

I don't think you understand what "stable" means. "Stable" means that the software doesn't change unnecessarily. In that regard, Ubuntu LTS is exactly the same as Debian. It has nothing to do with whether or not it is "resource hungry".

Besides, Ubuntu and Debian contain almost exactly the same software. I highly doubt when using the same DE that either would perform any better or worse than the other. The trend of making software more and more bloated pretty much halted years ago, so the gap in versions between the two almost certainly isn't making a difference.

On a side note, you do realize that Debian stable comes from Debian Sid (unstable), right? That's the whole point of having Sid in the first place.

Jodiendo
Offline
Joined: 01/09/2013

I agree with you on this one.

vpincini
Offline
Joined: 11/13/2014

onpon4

you are probably the only human being in the planet who claims that Ubuntu is more stable or perform better than Debian.
Is there any chance that your surname is Shuttleworth or something like it?

Anyway everyone has the right to have own opinions, right?

So keep using your beloved Ubuntu and I will keep using my Debian.

On a side note.. you do realize that Ubuntu is build starting fron Debian Unstable (Sid) and that there basically no chance that, after all the Canical patches, it will end up to be more stable that the Debian Stable suite, right?

ivanB1975
Offline
Joined: 08/29/2017

I think that Debian is rock solid and even the testing version is perfect for every day use. Ubuntu LTS is based on Debian testing and not on the unstable as well as Trisquel.

Personally I used the Debian testing and not the stable. So Trisquel suits my needs perfectly.

PS the topic could be answered: Indirectly it is already....

SuperTramp83

I am a translator!

Offline
Joined: 10/31/2014

>I think that Debian is rock solid and even the testing version is perfect for every day use.

this.

Jodiendo
Offline
Joined: 01/09/2013

Super tramp

Yes it is stable, but to learn debian it was not an easy one. But to be able to learn trisquel. it has been my fundamental curb for me.

Jodiendo
Offline
Joined: 01/09/2013

Supertramp
Remember my first libre gnu linux distro was trisquel 5. Of course I have migrated to other Gnu-Linux distros based on Debian, Because I have growth, becoming more understandable and knowledgeable in the matter. Before I was reading and absorbing tons of information,just plain and simply learning.

SuperTramp83

I am a translator!

Offline
Joined: 10/31/2014

viejo..
I have used Debian for over 3 years now and I don't plan to switch, I enjoy it like it is, never a bug, never a crash, just pure awesome raw powaaa :)

Jodiendo
Offline
Joined: 01/09/2013

SuperTramp83

i AGREE WITH YOU ON THIS ONE. one OF MY DESKTOPS IS JUST DEBIAN..

Heather

I am a member!

Offline
Joined: 03/06/2013

I've been using Debian derivatives since 2004ish and have to admit that my mentors were right and not just underestimating me and being condescending when they advised me that I would be fine technically but just plain not a good fit for the Debian community.

I wish I could call them all a bunch of poo poo heads because I do love Devuan and am less than thrilled about the direction I see Ubuntu going but the people I have the power to help are going to do much better with a Trisquel based on Ubuntu.

When I left Slackware, I didn't want to learn, I just wanted Ubuntu to work "well enough" that I would never have to use Windows.

How did I wind up learning so much? How did all of us?

Magic Banana

I am a member!

Offline
Joined: 07/24/2010

I would be very surprised if onpon4 uses Ubuntu. She uses Trisquel. Like her, I see little point in having a libre distribution based on Debian: just install Debian and never activate the "contrib" and "nonfree" sections of the repository. It could be nice to have a more freedom-focused Debian community, documentation that does not suggest the activation of the non-free sections, etc. On the other hand, that would be fragmenting the Debian community, which, in its majority, already is freedom-focused.

You do not seem to understand that Ubuntu's choice of packages in their default distribution does not matter to Trisquel. Except, maybe, for inspiration. Contrary to Ubuntu 16.04, Trisquel 8 uses MATE by default. As a consequence, it is lighter on resources than Debian, which ships GNOME Shell by default.

Neither Debian's nor Ubuntu's package classification between free and non-free perfectly follows FSF's. For instance, Debian considers that the GNU FDL documentation with invariant sections is non-free. However, both distribution are pretty close to having all packages classified like the FSF would classify them. I do not know which distribution has the highest number of misclassified packages. It does not matter much: not picking a few packages from "universe" is not what consumes time in Trisquel's development.

And, of course, at a new release of Ubuntu, the version of the programs in its repository are newer than those in Debian stable. In fact, the Ubuntu version right before a release of Debian stable ships more recent packages than Debian stable. And yes, Ubuntu LTS is stable: during the five years of support, the programs in its repository are only patched to correct significant bugs such as vulnerabilities. There is no new major version, except for the Web browser and for backported packages in a separate section of the repository (that you do not want to activate if you want stability).

loldier
Offline
Joined: 02/17/2016

I think the latest update to her current distribution of choice is "Ubuntu".

https://trisquel.info/en/forum/who-community-honestly-runs-trisquel-gnulinux#comment-121107

Magic Banana

I am a member!

Offline
Joined: 07/24/2010

My mistake.

SuperTramp83

I am a translator!

Offline
Joined: 10/31/2014

>it is lighter on resources than Debian, which ships GNOME Shell by default.

There are various flavors of Debian, you can download an ISO with Xfce, MATE, LXDE, Cinnamon..

Dave_Hunt

I am a member!

Offline
Joined: 09/19/2011

Debian Stretch will install Mate, if you accept the defaults. I forget what Jessie would do.

Heather

I am a member!

Offline
Joined: 03/06/2013

IIRC, it was still Gnome, but I was able to tweak it to look enough like Gnome 2 to be usable. I might be misremembering Wheezy as Jessie, though.

Devuan Jessie default is XFCE but I've never used it.

gd_scania
Offline
Joined: 09/13/2017

So what are the few but distinct differences between our FSDG (GNU Free OS distribution guidelines) and their DFSG (Debian software freedom guidelines)?

Magic Banana

I am a member!

Offline
Joined: 07/24/2010

I gave above the most significant difference:
Debian considers that the GNU FDL documentation with invariant sections is non-free.

ADFENO
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2012

The DFSG follows the Definition of Free Cultural Works, and the DFSG
seems to be less strictier in terms of recommending non-free functional
data (because the project currently has "contrib" and "nonfree"
repositories).

The Definition of Free Cultural Works applies exactly the same set of
essential freedoms --- that the free/libre software definition
stablishes to functional data --- in order to also cover non-functional
data.

So, as a comparison:

- Free/libre software movement (free/libre software philosophy, whole
gnu.org web site):

- Functional data: Must be free/libre.

- Non-functional data: At least shareable. Exception applies if the
data is to be included in a free/libre system distribution. In this
latter case, the data must also have the essential freedom to be
sold.

- Free/libre culture movement (Definition of Free Cultural Works):

- Functional data: Must be free/libre.

- Non-functional data: Also has to be free/libre, including having the
complete corresponding source files available either publicly or at
a request. Besides, the source files must be in a format that is
used mainly by free/libre software.

hd-scania [at] users [dot] sourceforge [dot] net writes:

> So what are the few but distinct differences between our FSDG (GNU
> Free OS distribution guidelines) and their DFSG (Debian software
> freedom guidelines)?
>

--
- https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
- Palestrante e consultor sobre /software/ livre (não confundir com
gratis).
- "WhatsApp"? Ele não é livre. Por favor, veja formas de se comunicar
instantaneamente comigo no endereço abaixo.
- Contato: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno#vCard
- Arquivos comuns aceitos (apenas sem DRM): Corel Draw, Microsoft
Office, MP3, MP4, WMA, WMV.
- Arquivos comuns aceitos e enviados: CSV, GNU Dia, GNU Emacs Org, GNU
GIMP, Inkscape SVG, JPG, LibreOffice (padrão ODF), OGG, OPUS, PDF
(apenas sem DRM), PNG, TXT, WEBM.

marioxcc
Offline
Joined: 08/13/2014

An additional difference from the ones mentioned by other users:

Debian accepts the Artistic License 1.0 as free software while the FSF does not.

Thus Debian contains Simutrans in the “free” section, while a distribution that follows the FSF guidelines would not include it at all.

I once asked the Simutrans developers to release it as free software. At my surprise, they took offense and banned me from their forum.

SuperTramp83

I am a translator!

Offline
Joined: 10/31/2014

Haven't tried MATE in years..heh, must..try..mate..ahora..mismo x_X

/me wonders what amazing improvements have been brought in

onpon4
Offline
Joined: 05/30/2012

> Is there any chance that your surname is Shuttleworth or something like it?

Marchant. Julie Marchant.

> Ubuntu is build starting fron Debian Unstable (Sid)

Yes. So is Debian.

> there basically no chance that, after all the Canical patches, it will end up to be more stable that the Debian Stable suite

Invalid. It doesn't follow.

Also, Canonical doesn't patch most programs with anything except security fixes. They tend to instead add new packages for what they want to change, presumably because it's easier to do it that way.

calher
Offline
Joined: 06/19/2015

My mind's reading voice pronounces your last name like a French word. Is there a more Anglicized way to say it?

onpon4
Offline
Joined: 05/30/2012

I do think it's French, but we pronounce it "MAR-chent" (like "merchant", but with the "A" from "car" instead of the "E"). My grandfather at my dad's side was apparently adamant that he was British and not French (he came from Canada), so who knows.

Jodiendo
Offline
Joined: 01/09/2013

onpon4

Lol

Like Americans use the word armor but the french and British used the word Armour

LOL

yeehi
Offline
Joined: 06/02/2012

I think Trisquel 8.0 should be Trisquel 9.0.

Trisquel, if it is to remain in sync with Ubuntu, should follow the current Ubuntu LTS. Since 8.0 still has not materialized, we should take advantage of this "opportunity", and re-set to release 8.0 based on Ubuntu 18.04. (Bionic Beaver?) Why rush to release before then? There certainly has been no rush to reach where we currently are.

As far as stability goes, I think a lot of that has to do with running a DTE (Desk Top Environment). My experience with DTEs has been appalling, but KDE-Neon has been a revelation. I certainly hope that Trisquel 8.0 comes with a Triskel option *using KDE-Neon*. (Please try it, if you have the opportunity. It is beautiful, apart from being stable.)

I think the issue of stewardship of the Trisquel project needs to be raised, rather than a discussion of what is upstream. The maintainer, to whom we are all grateful for starting this project, seems to have been unable to provide sufficient time to the project to keep it up-to-date. Either an additional or a different maintainer is needed, I believe.

strypey
Offline
Joined: 05/14/2015

KDE may be beautiful but it also uses more RAM than almost any other Desktop Environment. In fact, with the death of Unity, KDE may now be the most bloated DE.
Having played around with Mint, with both Cinammon and Mate, I think the choice of Mate for Trisquel 8 is a good one.

Since the goal of Trisquel is to be the most user-friendly libre distro, there's a balance to be struck between providing the bells and whistles expected of a modern Desktop Environment, and keeping it useful to people reconditioning old Windows machines to run in freedom. Ideally, Trisquel should run on a PC designed for XP, with a single 32-bit core and 1GB of RAM. Second-hand boxes that old are now ubiquitous and cheap, so if Trisquel runs adequately on them out-of-the-box, it will fly on anything newer. That way, users who are new to libre GNU-Linux will have a pleasant user experience that keeps them keen, rather as stuttering, hanging system that puts them off.

gd_scania
Offline
Joined: 09/13/2017

If you really need Qt but dnt wanna engage much RAM you instead need LXQt, it is Qt-only thin client desktop like Lumina from the FreeBSD universe.
KDE instead integrates Qt, Gtk+, Gtk2 which must engage too much your RAM.
Gtk+ desktops like GNOME, MATE, Cinnamon, Xfce, are they thin clients as LXQt vary on do you need large apps too much, like Firefox, Thunderbird, office suites etc.

Ignacio.Agullo
Offline
Joined: 09/29/2009

On 27/10/17 22:12, wrote:
> I think Trisquel 8.0 should be Trisquel 9.0.

I was afraid that this moment would eventually come. That the
delay of Trisquel 8 (more than one year) would grow to the point that it
would be suggested to wait for the next Ubuntu LTS release - and that it
would have a point (75% of the time has already passed, so why not to
wait for the remaining 25%?). Except that there is no reason to think
that Trisquel developers would work faster on the next Ubuntu LTS
release that they were working on the present one. So, my view on it...
it would mean more delay on exchange for nothing.

--
Ignacio Agulló · agullo [at] ati [dot] es

strypey
Offline
Joined: 05/14/2015

After a decade or so of running GNU-Linux on the desktop, I've learned the hard way that the newest version is *not* always the best version. My first distro was Ubuntu, and I always used to upgrade to the latest version as soon as it come out. But this did not give me the most stable OS, even if I did have more current versions of various apps.

"Trisquel, if it is to remain in sync with Ubuntu, should follow the current Ubuntu LTS."

The whole point of an LTS is that it provides Long Term Support.
https://www.ubuntu.com/info/release-end-of-life

Because Trisquel 7 was based on Ubuntu 14.04 LTS, it will continue to get security fixes and other critical updates until early 2019. It's still a perfectly usable OS, in fact it works a bit better now on the same hardware than it did when I first installed it.

As long as Trisquel 8 comes out before 14.04 support ends, we will be fine. Trisquel 8, like Ubuntu 16.04, will get critical updates until early 2021. By that time, Trisquel 9 will be out, and will get critical updates for it until early 2023. How many of us will even be using the same hardware by then?

ADFENO
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2012

He is doing work... see the "Code" link in the menu in the right side of
the main page. Also if I recall correctly, Trisquel has a development
mailing list.

nospam [at] nospam [dot] com writes:

> I think Trisquel 8.0 should be Trisquel 9.0.
>
> Trisquel, if it is to remain in sync with Ubuntu, should follow the
> current Ubuntu LTS. Since 8.0 still has not materialized, we should
> take advantage of this "opportunity", and re-set to release 8.0 based
> on Ubuntu 18.04. (Bionic Beaver?) Why rush to release before then?
> There certainly has been no rush to reach where we currently are.
>
> As far as stability goes, I think a lot of that has to do with running
> a DTE (Desk Top Environment). My experience with DTEs has been
> appalling, but KDE-Neon has been a revelation. I certainly hope that
> Trisquel 8.0 comes with a Triskel option *using KDE-Neon*. (Please try
> it, if you have the opportunity. It is beautiful, apart from being
> stable.)
>
> I think the issue of stewardship of the Trisquel project needs to be
> raised, rather than a discussion of what is upstream. The maintainer,
> to whom we are all grateful for starting this project, seems to have
> been unable to provide sufficient time to the project to keep it
> up-to-date. Either an additional or a different maintainer is needed,
> I believe.

Pablo G

I am a member!

Offline
Joined: 05/16/2012

I vote "stay" in Ubuntu.
I like its user friendly environment that I see in Trisquel. Not Unity of course.
Debian is not user friendly for newcomers.

davidnotcoulthard
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2014

"plus official backports (main branch only) which will provide a newer kernel."

I thnk jxself already handles that anyway (though the kernels don't come from Debian AFAIK)

Jodiendo
Offline
Joined: 01/09/2013

I vote "keep trisquel" based ON Ubuntu but under THE FSF RULES.