[Freedombox-discuss] hardware and software maybe separate?

[Arthur Lutz]

Hi,

I agree on the pure blend approach. It will keep a clean, upgradable system.

As far as hardware is concerned I strongly believe that we should keep a
focus on small footfrint devices such as plug computers, servers and full
blown computers are not the aimed material here. Personnaly I am
experimenting with QNAP 109 with debian on it
http://www.cyrius.com/debian/orion/qnap/ts-109/ I am already finding
bottlenecks for stuff that will not run on this kind of platform (I have
servers for those). If you want to develop using a full-powered system you
might have some suprises when you want to fit it on a small slow device.

Arthur

On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 7:43 PM, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 06:26:05PM +0100, e.waelde wrote:
>
>> In my humble opinion the hardware and software things of the freedom box
>> project could be viewed much more as separate items.
>>
>> a. software
>>
>> A working FreedomBox need not neccessarily be a small device. Just any box
>> available is good enough to experiment with the software side of things,
>> like routing, dns, identification, distributed storage and what not.
>>
>> I envision a set of Wiki pages with accurate instructions on how
>> to configure these services to make them work.
>> . want to try tor hidden services? This is how your box will be seen.
>> . want to try p2p distributed dns?
>> . want to create distributed storage ...
>> ...
>>
>> From this information missing configuration options in packaging will
>> emerge and fixing packages up will lead to installable package sets.
>>
>
> I agree that usability testing and fine-tuning configs for each
> functionality considered for FreedomBox can be more conveniently done on a
> more commonly accessible and powerful laptop or desktop computer.
>
> Good point that such preparations can be made usable also on its own, not
> tied to the 'box.
>
> I dislike calling such environment a "FreedomBox", however.  At most I
> would call it a Freedom system, as it isn't "box'ed".
>
> Anyone able to and interested in installing a plain standard Debian system
> can start *now* with above, be noisy both here on the list with experiences,
> and summarize findings at the wiki pages.
>
> Those more daring can try formalize the process a bit - either by making a
> snapshot with e.g. virtualbox, or (my recommended approach!) using
> live-build as discussed yesterday.
>
>
>
>  b. hardware
>>
>> Packaging things up to run on single-board-computers (like alix), routers,
>> plug computers is an entirely different task. Using Debian Pure Blends as a
>> basis seems entirely appropriate.
>>
>
> I (obviously - that's been my preaching/whining for a while now) agree to
> use the Debian Pure Blends approach - meaning everything _is_ Debian,
> nothing is "added on top" or "tuned".  For the end result.
>
> Anyone disagreeing with
> For mockups, drafts, development previews, or whatever you wanna call it, I
> see no need for "purity", however: Throw things together in an ugly dirty
> way at first if you prefer, just have in mind that the messier you do it the
> more likely you are the only one capable of tidying the mess, and that the
> aim is having everything - including configuration, eventual GUI and artwork
> - packaged as Debian packages and included officially in Debian.
>
> I do recommend anyone disagreeing with the Debian Pure Blends approach to
> speak up about their preferred alternative.  Not necessarily to debate
> (quite possibly I won't "fight" over it but just continue work on my own if
> noone wanna do it "my way") but so that you attract followers in whatever
> approach you find more proper.
>
>
> As pointed out by others too, I also see a third part:
>
> c. design
>
> I am not a designer, so won't elaborate further on this (but sure have
> opinions, so don't expect silence from me on this topic :-P ).
>
>
>
>
>  The two tasks are not independant, but IHMO they are not strongly coupled.
>>
>
> I assumed[1] it obvious that...
>
>  FreedomBox = Free software + box + design.
>
> Thanks for spelling it out! (and hope you don't mind my extending it :-)
>
>  - Jonas
>
>
> [1] In fact, what I assumed was obvious is that...
>
>  FreedomBox = Debian + Plug hardware + design
>
> ...but clearly not all on this list share that.
>
> --
>  * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
>  * Tlf.: <%2B45%2040843136>+45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
>
>  [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJNXr26AAoJECx8MUbBoAEhWFUP/i9gz2bWdzVhcNXwIEGdhvqw
> Mu1Dr+dOJxRo4o5ttzXxLSblv/HDDEXTT/Wl7QubsQWK+qCDHaicYSQIWtQDo1Oq
> yIKA/m6hyiDzczsqW+egQL6smh+j9VrbxatfIn3184wIEz4vinEBQQMqFuPAW0Gm
> 7dv/EZuBwPK9NwulCUb61V0rnNBLUceezkpMJh7MDi9pDNY3QkF0I79j6dlR/PRr
> XPApVP7eXhKEEFX7w5qDiRrg9bguTV5g8QINzYOOcwfnVi72GyXgyRM198ejXAV4
> OK1JXNXH6HzE1FVPFSSZkgV/UWGftkJVv/v2pfqQT+LdJwPzwWTY7obWYe6u5/IR
> Z0lb+dhe76v1gCflN36Y0nr2X3ipzNBeb9wCyNtV0/FRmkRa5RsFmFNe4vjVcpn7
> laHgjkVB61Vc4U7jLNN6pEbMrmCLUHwmgC73wsV/EVcpZ609ae67EgPhse+MBjqo
> mGh/mvYwyZ1JKBusM2Tb7ymNtA2mG2P0GIsu9tc5AH7/LsSSWnprYx+kqs1iPWYI
> k29m9FLEOJlr21miKblikOB1TgZP7DPfTXjFvNG4mDooku0cSnlPk6mARkoMnQFS
> /IkjaK886UWKTYy+fVOjUUxXbr4G+EXRph0lUYJKYUFSqHHMpU5M8D0QEtfTx/m4
> yornbftN1n/oq3QS7iFM
> =2ZRL
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/attachments/20110222/05171f46/attachment-0001.htm>