[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: distro or add-on?
At 03:35 рм 19/04/2001 +0000, -cEnsE- <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>As JFM stated, i did volunteer to help out where i can but to what extent
>i will be able, i dont know.
Welcome and good luck in your programming endeavors. About time ...
Yes we all know that we may all mean well but may not have the time.
>I was not stating that Indy should just pretend its not RedHat under the hood
>but i was just wondering whether someone who wants Indy would have to install
>RH first. I dont think that would be good.
Indy has always been (AFAIK) a RedHat derivative that is an
improved distribution but the fact that it is a distribution is making
it harder for it to catch on. I still feel and think that an add-on
package is the way to go.
What about this? An add-on package and a distribution provided it takes
minimal work to setup. So what I am saying is let us give the chance to
existing RedHat users to try Indy (maybe even with an uninstall option)
and if they like it they can keep it. Next time they can get the Indy
distribution ISO from wherever. I think I just made a 180 degree turn
but this is another option and I am interested to investigate all
available options. In the end it all depends on how much work is
involved on this. I still like the add-on since there is so much
information on installing RH and then you just slap on the Indy package
and you have a much friendlier desktop machine.
Sorry for the rambling.
Which one is easier to do?
The add-on or the distribution?
Which one is faster to fix after a new RH release?
How much time does each take (roughly)?