Debian derivative
- Login o registrati per inviare commenti
Currently, Trisquel is an Ubuntu derivative. We all know that Canonical, the business behind Ubuntu, is having it's own agenda. I would think that attempting to be a derivative of Ubuntu in the end will only make the problem of package maintenance worse.
Would it not be easier to have Trisquel deriving a direct Debian derivative? This could be Debian itself, but could also be LXDE, possibly including gnome-shell (for people like me, who like it).
I understand the consequences and the need for assistance to get this going, but would this in the end not make a more stable Free'd GNU/Linux distribution? On top of that, would this not make the distribution be more rolling, as in theory, the free software packages of debian could just be copied over into the Trisquel APT repository.
How about this?
There is also release schedule to consider.
Ubuntu has a 6 month release schedule and a 2 year LTS release schedule.
This certainty of release times translates directly to Trisquel releases.
Debian's stable release schedule is " when it's ready " ( which is necessary to make sure a complete release is made ) .
Tracking Debian Stable would mean much more erratic stable release times and tracking Debian Testing would mean chances of app failure/crash creeping into the Trisquel experience.
I think the Trisquel devs have made a fine choice to use Ubuntu as the current base. This means the benefits of both Debian and Ubuntu's Free Software packages are available to Trisquel users.
There are two issues here, which are both of different nature. The first issue is the release schedule, which you mention. I agree that Ubuntu has a regular release schedule. However, although Debian being erratic, the release schedule is much slower. It is true that this could be compensated by following Debian Testing, but this could create a buggy experience on Trisquel. However, this is why I suggested following the route of LMDE [I made a typo in my initial post].
The other issue, which I am more concerned about, is the political and business decisions made by Ubuntu. I believe the Ubuntu sphere so to speak is slowly going further away from Free Software, whereas Debian is much closer to it (and appears not to be wandering off badly.)
This said, I don't think the need is there right now, but I do think it should be considered.
I am a member!
Canonical's mainly just fixing up Debian. There is very little that is actually being done where it comes to introducing non-free software. Can anybody point out an instance where Canonical has developed a non-free component for which they distribute and it is used on the desktop?
I believe there is nothing. The same would be true of Linux Mint and many other distributions which we should be critical of. There is nothing wrong with using the work which they are doing to Trisquel's advantage. It's free software friendly.
Is there a reason to switch back to Debian? Maybe. At the moment though I think your going to be hard pressed to put together a good argument to do so. I should point out Debian is not complaint with the FSF's guidelines either. They are probably better about it than Ubuntu though. Debian clearly separates free and non-free software (actually Ubuntu does to mostly) except Debian has gone free with the kernel (Ubuntu has not).
You don't want to base it on Debian because that will end up taking more resources to maintain and make sure things don't break. Debian Testing, even though not as bleeding edge as Unstable, is still like the wild west in how things work. Linux Mint Debian started as a pure Testing distro, but had to move to Update Packs to keep things sane.
Your best bet is to still use Ubuntu based distros because Canonical and the community keep it solid. Especially the LTS releases which Trisquel 6.0 is based on and will be suported on desktop and server for 5 years.
- Login o registrati per inviare commenti