[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [PHILOSOPHY] Stability and Release Schedules



Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 11:19 +0900, Jens Petersen wrote:

John Wendel wrote:

For a start not everyone in the world has enough bandwidth for that: so they need iso images to be able to upgrade for example.

What you say applies to those with _very_ limited bandwidth. They'd
obtain the ISO's from some off-line source.

For those with limited bandwidth, who'd download the ISOs first, then

For those with severely limited bandwidth, the best bet is
to purchase pre-burned CDROMs.

[snip]

The same also applies to "late adopters" (E.g. people now installing
Fedora 4). Instead of wasting bandwidth on downloading ISOs, and then
replacing a large amount of the packages with updates on-line, they
could directly install the updated packages.

AFAICT, this is how many "lean" Debian derived distros (Knoppix?) work.

Knoppix is not "lean". It's true that it (currently) fits onto one
CDROM, but it's compressed, and has Open Office, several developer's
kits, and a lot of diagnostic stuff on it.

DSL is lean, and it does work as you suggest in part. But that is
still is not an "incremental approach to release", as I understand
the current subject matter.

Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]