Secondary architectures and marketing

[Matt Turner]

Hi,

On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 3:15 AM, Oliver Falk <oliver at linux-kernel.at> wrote:
> Matt Turner wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 3:59 AM, Oliver Falk <oliver at linux-kernel.at>
>> wrote:
>
> [ ... ]
>>
>> After working on the problem, Jay independently came to the exact
>> solution Gentoo arrived at before. This, by definition, is duplication
>> of effort.
>
> Yes. That's duplication of effort. And as Jay said. Why did that happen?
> Because of the lack of communication. See my other mail. A common axp
> patches store would help a lot in this case.
>
> Yes, a common distribution might also help. But again, some of us want to
> stick with there preferred distribution. I don't have anything against
> Debian, Gentoo and all the others. As long as people don't use commercial
> distributions, I'm happy.
>
> However. I'm used to run RH since a long time. I'm one of the first Fedora
> contributors. And the reasons I want to stick with my distribution:
> * I'm used to my tools (rpm, yum, koji, ...)
> * I'm administrating ~ 12 private RH/Fedora servers
> * I'm used to manage > 100 RH servers in my previous company
> * I'm managing people who administrate RH servers in my current company
>
> Matt. You ask me to use another distribution. Why don't you use another
> distribution?
>

First, thanks for the response.

While I think the one-distribution idea is the ideal solution, I guess
it's not really feasible.

To answer your final question of why don't I switch distributions: as
I told someone on IRC last night, if the roles were reversed and
Fedora was the well established distribution and Gentoo was just
starting, I could just as easily be suggesting people switch _to_
Fedora _from_ Gentoo.

>>>> You, Oliver, and Jay are two of the best developers we have, and it
>>>> seems to me to be such a waste of your time and effort to worry about
>>>> hunting down a build error and generating RPMs.
>>>
>>> Thx a lot for the flowers :-)
>>>
>>> Well, hunting down build errors is what we *have to do*. If we wouldn't
>>> do
>>> that, we wouldn't have recent gcc, glibc, xulrunner, firefox, kernel, ...
>>> And that we produce RPMs, well, we're packaging for Fedora. :-)
>>>
>>
>> Hunting down build errors is what you *have to do* to bring Fedora up
>> the the current level of Gentoo. It's not as general a statement as
>> you make it. Maybe _Fedora_ wouldn't have recent gcc, glibc,
>> xulrunner, firefox, kernel, ... but these packages already exist in a
>> working state elsewhere.
>
> I don't know nothing about the current state of Gentoo/Alpha, I must say...
> I think it's great another distribution also has Alpha support.
>
> Where can I find Gentoo AXP patches by the way?

Generally in the Bugzilla, but obviously this isn't a _good_ way to
share information.

We need to find a better way.

>>>> It's a hard question Oliver, but don't you feel that it might be better
>>>> for the architecture to join up efforts on one distribution?
>>>
>>> Sure. Fedora :-P
>>
>> I don't know if you intentionally dodge these questions or what.
>
> See my above comment.
>
>> Given the previous examples, I rhetorically ask wouldn't it be
>> beneficial to work on a sole distribution, thereby preventing this
>> wasteful duplication of effort.
>>
>> Surely you understood all this initially though.
>
> [ ... ]
>
> Matt. We all want *our* distribution to be *the one*. This will never happen
> on x86. It might happen on Alpha, but not today and not in near future.
>
> Join efforts is a good idea though!
>
> -of
>
> _______________________________________________
> axp-list mailing list
> axp-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/axp-list
>

Thanks,

Matt