[Freedombox-discuss] don't write code - user-friendly configuration

[paxcoder]

On 09/02/2010 12:07 AM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:n architecture, I didn't
>> I deprecate "local" modifications too. I'm still concerned with 
>> viability of making the project subset of the official distro, but 
>> for now, I'll take your word that it can be done. As long as it 
>> doesn't limit us in what we're set to do, I'm perfectly happy. Or 
>> more universally, I say obey the standards (de-facto or otherwise), 
>> unless they conflict with freedom or progress.
>
> "as long as it..."! He he, that was a good one.
>
> No, you can't eat the cake and have it at the same time. Reliable 
> upgradeability will slow down speed of progress, and until reaching 
> each success in working with package maintainers (which _will_ require 
> patience) it will limit us.

If cooperation with mainstream Debian limts us, or slows us down to a 
crawl, then we're certainly better off with stalling packages somehow 
before we can write our "hacks" (our repo or something), because then 
that would be in the interest of FB. I'm perfectly happy with unstable 
branch, but that's the limit for me - no slower. However, I don't see 
why it should go any slower if those tools you mention are as useful as 
you first implied. We'll just have to develop on experimental as - I 
presume - things are usually done.
But again, yes, "as long as it...", because this is first and foremost 
Freedom Box. Don't get me wrong I want to see it run on/be Debian 
(Debian is all I use anyhow), but no-one can demand demand it 
unconditionally - on the expense of the project. That would be 
irrational. This will be yet another test to see if Debian is indeed a 
universal operating system. I have no doubt that Debian will pass this 
one as well, but if you ask me, in the alternative universe where it 
wouldn't, we'll use the fork.
Anyway, that's enough blabber from me (on this topic ;-) ), I'll be off now.

Keep it real.
--Luka Marčetić

P.S. Nobody replied yet on the possibility of alternative SMTP servers 
at friends'. Does this mean it can't be done?