[Freedombox-discuss] Objectives and Introduction
dr at jones.dk
Fri Jun 10 16:02:56 UTC 2011
On 11-06-10 at 09:42am, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 12:36:22 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk>
> > No, I am not against tying FreedomBox to DDD - quite the
> > opposite!
> > I am, however, concerned if we agree on what it means to be a
> > "Debian Pure Blend"
> Ok, thanks, I understand you now. I'm more interested in delivering
> working code than I am in fighting over definitions. But for those
> not intimately close to the details, describing what we're building as
> being "like a Debian Pure Blend" seems useful for the moment.
Oh, I am not interested in fighting either :-)
Excellent to prepend such "like a..." to not risk watering out the DDD
concept if it turns out that what FreedomBox becomes is not exactly
perfectly how I dream about for the Debian Pure Blend concept.
> I hope that more will become clear as I make time to write down what I
> consider "already decided" as a way of focusing attention on the
> places that need effort to fill gaps in our knowledge and code on the
> path to an initial reference implementation.
I expect so too. There is a good chance FreedomBox is a perfect match
for a Debian Pure Blend: My main reason fighting for "purity" is that I
find it crucial for long-term survival of a "blend" - which should be of
high priority for FreedomBox. And I suspect you agree with me on how it
makes sense to make use of Debian for FreedomBox, and others here on the
list does too as we align our understanding on it all. Time will tell.
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the Freedombox-discuss