On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 11:24:12 +0200 Free Ekanayaka wrote:
> If you we limit our scope to full-Debian CDDs, which contain only
> official Debian packages and are released when Debian is released,
> probably PDK is overkill,
...which _is_ the scope of CDDs.
CDD is an ambiguitive abbreviation, but the project behind the term has
explicitly declared a goal of "all within Debian". So interpreting CDD
as "Custom [repackaging or extensions of the] Debian Distribution" is
wrong. The correct interpretation is "Custom [subset of the] Debian
Distribution".
Please note, that I welcome repackaging and extending Debian. Just
please do not confuse things by misusing a term already defined for
something else: It is then a _derived_ distribution, not a CDD.
Your main point still stands: PDK might be relevant as a tool both for
CDDs and for derived distributions.
- Jonas
--
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
- Enden er n_r: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm
pgpLsAPwzz2Os.pgp
Description: PGP signature
|
