xvendor

server OS

Message-ID: <20080417062949.GH6462@finlandia.home.infodrom.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 08:29:49 +0200
From: Joey Schulze <joey@...odrom.org>
To: xvendor@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: distributions at l.fd.o

Solar Designer wrote:
> It was just pointed out to me, thanks to the Mandriva folks, that a list
> similar to xvendor was created recently:
> 
> 	http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/distributions
> 
> Here's what Lucas, who hosts that list, wrote to me regarding us having
> two similar lists:
> 
> "I can only see two solutions here:
> (1) continue to co-exist
> (2) merge the lists
> 
> If you choose (1), I don't think that imposing some policies on the two
> lists, like "focus on desktop issues" for distributions@...d.o will work.
> 
> If you choose (2), I think that we should keep distributions@...d.o:
> - there are 129 subscribers on it, vs 40 on xvendor.
> - freedesktop.org sounds like a better umbrella project for distro
>   collaboration."
> 
> My opinion is that it only makes sense to continue with two lists if we
> can actually identify how the lists will differ from each other, and I'd
> be fine with having the desktop-specific cross-vendor issues (including
> graphical boot, interoperability and licensing of desktop-specific apps,
> etc.) being the topic for distributions@...d.o rather than xvendor (and
> I think that will work most of the time).

When the focus of distributions@....o lays on desktop issues, both
lists in parallel make sense to me since different issues are topic.
However, with both lists being merely unknown it's questionable if
those issues will be discussed on either list.

If the focus of distributions@....o lays on desktop issues, topics
such as what to do with cdrecord, GCC and library incompatibilities
and the like would not be wanted there.

Regards,

	Joey

-- 
Let's call it an accidental feature.  -- Larry Wall