[Fedora-livecd-list] Pilgrim

Toshio Kuratomi a.badger at gmail.com
Mon Dec 4 20:26:01 UTC 2006


On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 23:54 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 18:07 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> >> Ahm ed wrote:
> >>> I'm not sure if I missed this discussion or not, but what is going to 
> >>> happen to kadischi now that pilgrim is the "default" or "chosen" tool 
> >>> for Fedora live-cd generation. Will this project contiue or will it 
> >>> merge with pungi and pilgrim.
> >> Pilgrim is being pursued for reasons outlined in 
> >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraSummit/LiveCD. Anyone interested in 
> >> continuing to develop Kadischi can certainly do so. It is GPL'ed after 
> >> all. Consider it a merge otherwise.
> > 
> > I walked away from the summit with the understanding that we were going
> > to pursue integrating pilgrim and pungi for our official livecds.  But
> > the Kadischi code would stay separate and Jaspar Hartline volunteered to
> > be the maintainer which did not have any unfavorable reactions.  What
> > piece of the discussion led you to think of it as a merge?  (I was only
> > on IRC for this portion of things so I might have missed out on
> > something.)
> > 
> > It would be highly beneficial for Kadischi and pilgrim to remain
> > unmerged.  They are two very different tools which aim to address two
> > separate corners of the liveCD creation audience.
> > 
> 
> As of now, I dont see anyone developing Kadischi further. I dont think 
> there is separate niches for both tools. I would prefer a single tool to 
> cover all the needs of people who want to create Live CD's. 
> Functionality wise, I consider that a merge.
> 
Jasper has repeatedly stated that he is continuing to work on Kadischi.
I asked him today and he confirmed that this is true.  Asserting that
Kadischi is not being developed is a disservice to the community who is
using it and the people that are maintaining it.

The reason there are separate niches is that Kadischi is dead simple to
use for one-offs while pilgrim is easier to use for developing more
official livecds.

If I'm a college student with a Fedora Core install set, I can create a
custom livecd with Kadischi very easily.  It reuses anaconda, an
interface that I have already been exposed to when I installed Fedora on
the machine and is able to quickly create a livecd image for me.

OTOH, if I'm spinning the official Fedora Livecd or otherwise want to
create reproducible, scripted builds to which I can make incremental
changes until I have something I'm ready to distribute, pilgrim makes a
lot of sense.  It has a commandline oriented, edit-the-package-list to
create an install mentality.  Kadischi has scriptability through
anaconda's kickstart which can serve this purpose but IMHO pilgrim's
inheritable package lists are a nicer interface for people who haven't
used kickstart before.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-livecd-list/attachments/20061204/a09025f6/attachment.sig>


More information about the Fedora-livecd-list mailing list