141–150 of 155 posts
It's interesting that the Paul brings up the trademark license clause regarding for-pay distribution. If you are using the Mozilla Mark(s) for the unaltered binaries you are distributing, you may not charge for that product. While it restricts a freedom that Debian is unlikely to exercise, it's still a restriction. Presumably, that makes the trademark license indigestible to the Debian foundation?
It's interesting that the Paul brings up the trademark license clause regarding for-pay distribution. If you are using the Mozilla Mark(s) for the unaltered binaries you are distributing, you may not charge for that product. While it restricts a freedom that Debian is unlikely to exercise, it's still a restriction. Presumably, that makes the trademark license indigestible to the Debian foundation?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Debian implements the comical definition of Bureaucracy really well. Missing the forest for the trees and thinking that every single piece of software is built and released the same way. For a Linux distro that has been around so long, it's mind boggling they still don't understand that. Wine used to have the same problem - Wine's cycle had the Chrome-like cycle before Chrome even existed. Release every 2 weeks like…
> For a Linux distro that has been around so long, it's mind boggling they still don't understand that.* They definitely do understand that - they also offer more packages than any other x86 operating system. It's just that they have a reason for doing it their way. The operating system is meant to provide a stable base, and the user can then select particular software for more frequent upgrades by adding their own t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or write faster apps? Caching pages for logged-out users is part of web site performance 101.
Right so even if your application is only meant for 10 concurrent users it's your duty to optimize it to the point where it can handle HN traffic... Come on man.
Classical Linux userland devs (I count myself among them) had a tradition of dissing web development as "not real software development". I also do web development, and it seems Debian could benefit from ditching that mentality and encouraging a volunteer (or using some well-spent funds) to make their bug tracker safe for the 2016 web. All it probably needs is a caching proxy.
I don't understand why Debian has anything to do with Firefox. Why does the operating system have any say on what applications get released and how often? Isn't this the whole point of using free, open source software? To be able to choose your own components? Why do we need Debian bundling Firefox?
Debian isn't an operating system. Linux an operating system and is a small part of the Debian distribution.
No. Debian GNU/Linux is an operating system (specifically a variant of GNU/Linux). Linux is a kernel, not an operating system (I think only Linus tries to claim that a kernel is all that makes an operating system -- but I'd require at least libc and POSIX coreutils before you can begin to call something an operating system).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point of a distribution is to provide a complete, working system. It's not just a collection of independent components, it's curated such that the whole is coherent.
So the shit MS got blasted for: bundling IE with Windows.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps I'm being unfair —because I know how the sausage is made— but if it looks like it's generated by Perl (clunky late-90s design, obvious interactive parts, filter, logins, etc) it probably scales like a squirrel carrying watermelons. (One at a time is okay.) Debian should definitely do more to stop this from happening but this isn't the first time a HN link to a clunky old webapp has taken it down.
I'm going to have to ask: is "scales like a squirrel carrying watermelons" your own material, or is that a saying invented somewhere else? The imagery is just so apt, the etymology of the phrase is suddenly piquing my curiosity. EDIT: I wasn't joking around, people. Don't you find the etymology of such colorful phrasing to be interesting?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps I'm being unfair —because I know how the sausage is made— but if it looks like it's generated by Perl (clunky late-90s design, obvious interactive parts, filter, logins, etc) it probably scales like a squirrel carrying watermelons. (One at a time is okay.) Debian should definitely do more to stop this from happening but this isn't the first time a HN link to a clunky old webapp has taken it down.
I fail to understand how the burden of a clunky outdated web app should be the end users problem. You may be able to spot a 90's style perl-based web app but some of us are much younger and in a different field than web development. I don't think it's worth shaming OP and HN for using the Internet as intended. The real problem seems to be that Debian is using outdated technology for their bug tracker.
Given that we're quite a technical group of people and this was a submission about something that is even more populated by technical people I just expected a little more common sense.
And no, this isn't just to help Debian. When you share a link and inadvertently kill off their server the people trying to read the story you shared suffer too.
Linking to static stuff is better for everybody.
People, This is great news for few of us. But it has been hard to read trough this comments and realize how much ignorance about what Debian is, how it works, what the Debian bug tracker is, what a voluntary-based project is, and to read some assertions and prepotency around in HN If you see ANYTHING wrong with Debian, go fix it, or shut up and go to sell your stuff to another one. Debian is not a startup. Debian is…
Users use computers to compute - "using linux" is not a primary task. I'm not saying open source should compromise on their core values, but Debian could stand to take a page out of, say, the Tor Project's book and focus harder on usability.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I fail to understand how the burden of a clunky outdated web app should be the end users problem. You may be able to spot a 90's style perl-based web app but some of us are much younger and in a different field than web development. I don't think it's worth shaming OP and HN for using the Internet as intended. The real problem seems to be that Debian is using outdated technology for their bug tracker.
Using the Internet as intended? You're making an assumption that every webserver is intended to be swamped by a load of people who have very little interest in (here) discussing or fixing a bug. That's what the webapp here is for. Given that we're quite a technical group of people and this was a submission about something that is even more populated by technical people I just expected a little more common sense. And…
> I just expect a little more common sense
I understand where you're coming from. But, speaking personally, everything you said was news to me. This field is more diverse than you suggest. You might want to consider we're not all Linux users and we're not all web developers or administrators.
Even if we have us experiences in those areas in th past, maybe it's been a while. Maybe we're tired and not thinking straight. Maybe it's not our problem so we're not even thinking about it? The point is, you're expecting too much from people.
> Linking to static suff is better for everybody
So I still think scolding users is an ineffective way to solve an infrastructure problem. I can't imagine a scenario where that would work out successfully.