Talk:Debian: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 20:25, 25 February 2014 editDsimic (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers39,664 edits →Debian private practices and Debian Women activities: Replied← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 12:20, 5 July 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk \| contribs)Bots, Template editors2,302,431 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Debian/Archive 10) (bot
(410 intermediate revisions by 88 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Skip to talk}}
	{{talkheader\|noarchive=yes}}
			{{Talk header\|noarchive=yes \|search=no}}
	{{ArticleHistory
			{{Article history
	\|action1=FAC\|action1date=18:13, 3 July 2004\|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations/Index/July 2004#Debian\|action1result=failed\|action1oldid=4454441		\|action1=FAC\|action1date=18:13, 3 July 2004\|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations/Index/July 2004#Debian\|action1result=failed\|action1oldid=4454441
	\|action2=~~GAN~~\|action2link=~~Talk~~:Debian/~~GA1~~\|action2date=02:05, 4 ~~December~~ 2008 (UTC)\|action2result=~~not listed~~\|action2oldid=~~255624570~~		\|action2=PR\|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Debian/archive1\|action2date=10:00, 6 June 2008 (UTC)\|action2result=\|action2oldid=
			\|action3=GAN\|action3link=Talk:Debian/GA1\|action3date=02:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)\|action3result=not listed\|action3oldid=255624570
	\|currentstatus=FFAC
			\|action4=GAN\|action4link=Talk:Debian/GA2\|action4date=13:28, 24 June 2014 (UTC)\|action4result=listed\|action4oldid=614225287
			\|dykdate=28 June 2014
			\|dykentry= ... that the name of the ''']''' ] is a combination of the first names of its creator ] and his then-girlfriend Debra?
			\|currentstatus=FFAC/GA
			\|topic=technology
	}}		}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=GA\|vital=yes\|1=
	{{WikiProjectBannerShell\|1=
	{{~~Linuxproject\|class=B~~\|importance=Top}}		{{WikiProject Linux\|importance=Top}}
	{{~~WPFS\|class=B~~\|importance=High\|software-importance=~~Mid~~\|~~computing~~-importance=~~Low~~}}		{{WikiProject Computing\|importance=High \|free-software=yes \|free-software-importance=High \|software=yes\|software-importance=High}}
	{{WikiProject Open~~\|class=B~~\|importance=mid}}		{{WikiProject Open\|importance=mid}}
	}}		}}
	{{User:MiszaBot/config		{{User:MiszaBot/config
	\|archiveheader = {{aan}}		\|archiveheader = {{aan}}
	\|maxarchivesize = 32K		\|maxarchivesize = 32K
	\|counter = 5		\|counter = 10
	\|minthreadsleft = 4		\|minthreadsleft = 4
	\|minthreadstoarchive = 1		\|minthreadstoarchive = 1
Line 23:		Line 29:
	\| leading_zeros = 0		\| leading_zeros = 0
	\| indexhere = yes		\| indexhere = yes
	}}{{archives\|search=yes\|index=Talk:Debian/Archive index\|bot=~~MiszaBot~~ I\|age=90}}		}}{{archives\|search=yes\|index=Talk:Debian/Archive index\|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III\|age=90}}
			{{Broken anchors\|links=

			* <nowiki>]</nowiki> The anchor (Sid Phillips) ]. <!-- {"title":"Sid Phillips","appear":{"revid":229500348,"parentid":229435867,"timestamp":"2008-08-03T00:57:55Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":,"replaced_anchors":{"Sidney Phillips":"Sid Phillips"}},"disappear":{"revid":1215488592,"parentid":1215375927,"timestamp":"2024-03-25T12:58:57Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":}} -->
	== GA Review ==
			}}

			== Software by the Debian project ==
	This article was up for review for promotion to "Good Article" status in December 2008. The promotion failed. If anyone would like to contribute please follow instructions from the reviewer ] at: .

	== Feature list ==

	What about adding a feature list of the advantages of Debian over others?
	For example preseeded installations.

	== References ==

	{{reflist}}

	== Steam ==

	It seems to me that the availability of Steam for Linux has gotten a lot of attention in the trade press, with some commentators saying it could be a game changer. I think it is notable enough for a mention.--] (]) 23:39, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

	: Sorry, but isn't that better suitable for the ] and maybe ] articles? -- ] (]) 01:51, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

	:: Steam OS beta is now available and Debian Wheezy (stable) based. See following blog post why this is more relevant than ever for Debian: http://richardhartmann.de/blog/posts/2013/12/14-SteamOS/ There is no doubt that SteamOS should be covered on the Debian article :) ] 17:49, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

	::: Got it! You're right, that totally deserves to be mentioned in this article. — ] (]) 17:58, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

	== First Image ==

	Is it really necessary, to repeat it three times?
	"only the '''first''' optical iso image of any of its downloadable sets is sufficient. Debian requires the '''first''' installable image, but uses online repositories for additional software. Debian's basic installation requires only the '''first''' CD or DVD of its release in order to have a working desktop ex" ] (]) 07:35, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

	== Debian private practices and Debian Women activities ==

	The undoing from 80.100.245.50 claims vandalism. As I understand, the content does meet Misplaced Pages requirements (neutral point of view, verifiability, etc). Most references are already in Debian, from many different contributors. The bug reports cited are archived, hosted in Debian and have been subject to Debian review. All references are appropriate for an article about Debian.

	I would like whoever makes the undoing to challenge the material or to prove that what was written is wrong. In the meantime, I will restore the content. It is obvious that the user from 80.100.245.50 is the one doing vandalism. For instance, it is a fact that debian-private and a related General Resolution exist.

	I would like to request for arbitration if consensus cannot be reached. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 04:23, 16 February 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

	The users removing content are refusing to talk, challenge the material or prove the opposite. What does campaigning have to do? Please be specific, what points have been infringed (advertising, opinion pieces...)? This is the second time a user has removed debian-private existence, which is an easy verifiable fact.

	] has removed the references about account locking, leaving the material unsourced. The reference in "Developer recruitment" shows that Sven Luther, Andrew Suffield and Jonathan/Ted Walter are in this situation. This is not one specific case. This is not an ongoing dispute, but facts that happened in 2007. Expulsion from Debian is not something theoretical.

	About applicant influx, "As in the wider technology field", I challenge that edit. Debian has less than 1% developers identified as female.

	The removal of the "Female recruitment" subsection would make sense if the previous edits were right, but it is not the case.

	] is a proud Debian user. It is significant that the user has Catalan skills and that those are better than Spanish ones. ] has removed facts without a good explanation and has proved to be unable to keep neutrality. This user has a conflict of interest (]).

	] already found this article to fail the neutral point of view. I request that readers do not remove facts they do not like without explained reasons. I will restore the content again. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 00:17, 18 February 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	* How is it "significant" that I know some Catalan? You should familiarise yourself with ]. And how do I have a "conflict of interest"? ] (]) 10:47, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

	:: ] has removed virtually all content without a good explanation, twisting the remaining content. The user advertises to contribute using Debian GNU/Linux, therefore a conflict of interest is a likely cause. Assuming the user has actually read the content, one reference title is "debian-user-catalan ruled by fear". Thus Catalan and Spanish skill levels are significant. The user may be subscribed to debian-user-catalan and know the background. ] (]) 22:19, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

	: I am biased in favor of Debian by default, and a few factoids found in these edits should be included in the article, but the edits overall are an egregious ] violation. The English is bad, the references are largely sub par, and the use of weasel words is plentiful. Overall, it's just a lot of editorializing over largely fringe topics. Please don't use Misplaced Pages if you have ]. --] (]) 14:36, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

	:: Indeed, ] is a Debian developer. But he may help anyway. Please tell what "factoids" should be included and suggest a better English wording. ] (]) 22:19, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

	The users removing content are still refusing to talk, challenge the material or prove the opposite; ] has challenged the ] only. Another excuse: bug reports and emails are not necessarily reliable sources. But these bug reports and emails are reliable sources for the presented material. ] even mentions the template to cite public mailing lists. I can improve the citation style if necessary. Besides, there are other reference types. A General Resolution is a reliable source. This is the third time a user has removed debian-private.

	There has been only censorship so far. I am trying to improve a Misplaced Pages article. The dispute resolution is not advancing. Can we start moving forward?
	: Developers can be expelled by the leader's delegates.<ref name="constitution" />
	Any objections?

	In the meantime, I will restore the content. There has been not a single sensible explanation to remove it. ] (]) 22:19, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

	:Consensus has been acquired, the content should not be on the Debian page ] ] (]) 09:54, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

			Being a Linux distribution Debian consists almost entirely of free and open-source software written by 3rd parties. But some software is being developed by Debian, e.g. ], the ], ], and maybe some other stuff. Not sure whether this Debian-own software should get an own section. <span style="text-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.2em black">]</span><sup>]</sup> 18:41, 29 August 2016
	:: Consensus has not been reached, since there has been no consensus-building in the first place. I would like to point that ] cannot handle criticism. This user did remove the ] criticism along with the content despite an ongoing discussion (Mthink cpp). This user lies in the user talk page when claiming that I accuse "those (several users) who revoke the edits of vandalism"; this Debian talk page clearly shows what I have actually written. ] (]) 01:40, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

			== No longer free software/open source? ==
	No other user is even trying to talk. There has been not a single effort to challenge the material. This is plain censorship. This is not a content-related issue, but conduct-related. Since administrator help has already been requested, I will wait for their answer. ] (]) 01:40, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

			It includes non-free firmware in the installer. Is this already mentioned? ] (]) 12:21, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
	* Guys and IP addresses, this whole thing is quite ridiculous. Personally, I've been following it from day one, but haven't had enough energy to investigate/research the whole thing into detail. Are there any people who can shed some light, please, but not only by stating that the provided references are not good enough etc.? — ] (] \| ]) 01:57, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

			:I do not know if these links
	:: I ask ] to check just the first sentence, the one I have written:
	::: Developers can be expelled by the leader's delegates.<ref name="constitution" />
	:: This is in the , section 3.2.2. ] (]) 02:30, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

			https://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html
	::: So what? Should a Debian developer be protected like a polar bear, making his/her own membership unconditionally of a lifetime nature? Sure thing that a constitution needs something like this, as the last measure in line if a developer starts acting crazy. — ] (] \| ]) 02:37, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

			https://web.archive.org/web/20231102171742/https://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html
	:::: Please keep to the point. Did I provide a fact and a reliable source? ] (]) 02:43, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

			https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2022/10/msg00001.html
	::::: Yes, you did. What next? — ] (] \| ]) 02:50, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

			https://web.archive.org/web/20231102171923/https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2022/10/msg00001.html
	:::::: Thanks. I do not want to abuse ]'s time. I am still waiting for the administrator answer and there are other users that disagree. The next sentence for a different volunteer. Of course, if ] thinks he can do better than other users and that he can represent them, I will proceed. ] (]) 03:02, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

			are already mentioned in the article or now, but some information may also need to be changed to reflect the changes in the policy of Debian.
	::::::: I don't think I'm better than other people; anyway, you should be presenting your arguments more cleanly, possibly with alternative/additional references, if they're available. Just as an advice. — ] (] \| ]) 03:22, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

			I hope I'm using the talk page correctly.
	: What about of the debian-private mailing list (which is part of this ), for example? That makes it look completely different when compared to the conspiracy theories presented by 84.127.80.114. — ] (] \| ]) 02:25, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

			I do not yet know where I should place this information about the policy change in Debian.
	:: Can anyone cite or explain these so called "conspiracy theories"? How does an article about a General Resolution and a user reply compare to the actual General Resolution? ] (]) 02:43, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

			Other users may know where the best place in this article is to place the references.
	I have received an answer from the administrator. Please try to ]. As I said, I am trying to improve a Misplaced Pages article. I know there is a reason users acted that way. It is difficult to accept the truth. Maybe I presented too much material at once. But criticism is actually a good thing. Misplaced Pages has its ] and users are still in the project. I will try to reintroduce the material more slowly.

			I think near the top changing
	My intent is to not cite too many references and keep the changes within a reasonable size. Of course, I hope users can provide more useful feedback if they think further explanations are necessary.

			"Since its founding,"
	The administrator made a content challenge in the ]. I would like to request the assistance of ].
	: Debian makes many non-security decisions not available to the public, via debian-private.<ref>{{cite web \|url = https://lists.debian.org/debian-private/ \|title = Private discussions among developers \|publisher = Debian \|accessdate = 2014-02-14}}</ref>
	The reference proves debian-private existence. A reference in the next paragraph will show one decision. I do not know if security decisions are made in debian-private. As I understand, it is absurd to criticize security decisions done privately. Is it disputed that Debian makes many non-security decisions via debian-private?

			to
	Because there are no objections, I will add the previous sentence about expulsion. ] (]) 12:22, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

			"Since its founding till 2022,"
	I have contacted administrator ] again. ] wrote "They can alternatively be forcefully dismissed from their position when necessary.". This is a good chance to see the reaction from the other editors. ] (]) 15:27, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

			And putting the links in a "ref" may be a way to show the change.
	I would like to request the assistance of ] about the changes I am trying to make. His feedback is far better than the silence of everyone else. I do not find fair that ] has to do the work reverters have not done. I will not blame him if he remains silent. Discussions on this talk page are not going anywhere, thus I should start using the noticeboard.

			Though there may be a better way to link to the change.
	I repeat my last question: is it disputed that Debian makes many non-security decisions via debian-private? ] (]) 14:05, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

			] (]) 21:19, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
	: Well, unfortunately I have no first-hand insights regarding the way Debian development works internally, and what actually goes through the debian-private mailing list, for example; therefore, I can rely only on published sources, like . See, 84.127.80.114, majority of your edits did look like some kind of revealing the conspiracy theories, and people tend to react badly to those; however, very few editors were willing to discuss the whole thing and provide references. To me, that's strange, but it's not my call to draw any conclusions here. — ] (] \| ]) 22:28, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
			: I'm sorry but that's not a ]. Debian an install image with proprietary firmware long before 2022, and the FSF's disavowal of Debian long before that date. "Since its founding" may not be accurate, but "until 2022" is definitely incorrect. ] (]) 11:38, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
			::I've updated it to a better synthesis that talks about how Debian generally follows FOSS principles but includes some proprietary software. ] (]) 03:35, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

			== Debian latest software version ==
	:: Insight is not required, just neutrality and will to accept whatever is true. Revealing facts about "decisions" and "private" does sound like a conspiracy theory. I already stated my intent but I guess I should provide further explanations.
	:: I think we can agree on these facts. debian-private exists for private discussion. This private status is important enough that a General Resolution was necessary.
	:: The controversy does not lie in those time-sensitive messages or with personal information. The criticism comes because of messages related to decisions.
	:: That view about debian-private should be included, it would be representative. Can we reliably assume that the reply is actually from Joe Wreschnig (piman)? ] (]) 16:59, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

			Latest version as of 2/13/2024 is 12.5 (not 12.4) ] (]) 03:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
	: Hey Sven, is that you? This style reminds me of those discussions on the Debian mailing lists, maybe I'm wrong. Anyway, it doesn't really matter. The onus is on the person who adds content to make sure that that content abides by the relevant policies and guidelines. If you've read up on these, just go ahead and try again. If the content is acceptable, it will stay; otherwise someone will probably remove it. --] (]) 17:11, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

			== Debian Logo ==
	:: Patterns emerge indeed. That would explain why I was blocked.
	:: I see ] knows Sven Luther from long ago. May he could help when I address the Sven Luther case later.
	:: I am aware of the burden of evidence. I do not expect ] to reveal anything not published already. I was asking about the provided , where Don Armstrong confirms that "Bans are published as they are done with reasoning to debian-private and are subject to the oversight of Debian Developers." I guess the reference should be near the "many decisions" sentence. ] (]) 16:59, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

			The article claims that the "genie bottle" was originally part of the logo and fell out of use. That seems to me to be either misleading or simply incorrect. When the logo was originally designed, there were two versions, one for public use and one for official use. The public use one was the one with the bottle, and the official one was the swirl only. Shortly after that logo design won the competition, it was decided to swap the meaning of both logos (one of the reasons being that is was weird that the official only use logo was a subset of the public one).
	While ]'s change restores the neutrality, the fact is inaccurate. The project leader cannot expel developers directly, as explained in section 8.1.2; only delegates (and resolutions) can. I still believe my wording is better. Perhaps it should be added that "A project leader cannot expel developers directly." The "when necessary" is noise, but I guess consensus is better than perfection. ] (]) 16:59, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
			The official logo guidelines still show that the bottle version still exists and is reserved for official use.

			So it's not that the bottle version "was effectively superseded", it simply was not the correct logo to use anymore. ] (]) 11:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
	: D'oh! Is there an end to that bureaucracy? Project leaders, delegates, resolutions, general resolutions... What's next? — ] (] \| ]) 20:25, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 12:20, 5 July 2024

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Debian article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Debian is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.

Debian has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 3, 2004	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
June 6, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
December 4, 2008	Good article nominee	Not listed
June 24, 2014	Good article nominee	Listed
A fact from this article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 28, 2014.The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the name of the Debian* operating system is a combination of the first names of its creator Ian Murdock and his then-girlfriend Debra?*
Current status: Former featured article candidate, current good article

This

level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Linux Top‑importance

	Linux portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linux, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Linux on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinuxWikipedia:WikiProject LinuxTemplate:WikiProject LinuxLinux
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Computing: Software / Free and open-source software High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by Free and open-source software (assessed as High-importance).

Open (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Open, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OpenWikipedia:WikiProject OpenTemplate:WikiProject OpenOpen

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9
Archive 10

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

] The anchor (Sid Phillips) has been deleted.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Software by the Debian project

Being a Linux distribution Debian consists almost entirely of free and open-source software written by 3rd parties. But some software is being developed by Debian, e.g. deb (file format), the Debian installer, Advanced Packaging Tool, and maybe some other stuff. Not sure whether this Debian-own software should get an own section. User:ScotXW 18:41, 29 August 2016

No longer free software/open source?

It includes non-free firmware in the installer. Is this already mentioned? Alohaidled (talk) 12:21, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

I do not know if these links

https://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20231102171742/https://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html

https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2022/10/msg00001.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20231102171923/https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2022/10/msg00001.html

are already mentioned in the article or now, but some information may also need to be changed to reflect the changes in the policy of Debian.

I hope I'm using the talk page correctly.

I do not yet know where I should place this information about the policy change in Debian.

Other users may know where the best place in this article is to place the references.

I think near the top changing

"Since its founding,"

"Since its founding till 2022,"

And putting the links in a "ref" may be a way to show the change.

Though there may be a better way to link to the change.

Other Cody (talk) 21:19, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry but that's not a proper synthesis. Debian distributed an install image with proprietary firmware long before 2022, and the FSF's disavowal of Debian also existed long before that date. "Since its founding" may not be accurate, but "until 2022" is definitely incorrect. inclusivedisjunction (talk) 11:38, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

I've updated it to a better synthesis that talks about how Debian generally follows FOSS principles but includes some proprietary software. Dexcube (talk) 03:35, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Debian latest software version

Latest version as of 2/13/2024 is 12.5 (not 12.4) 27.110.206.46 (talk) 03:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Debian Logo

The article claims that the "genie bottle" was originally part of the logo and fell out of use. That seems to me to be either misleading or simply incorrect. When the logo was originally designed, there were two versions, one for public use and one for official use. The public use one was the one with the bottle, and the official one was the swirl only. Shortly after that logo design won the competition, it was decided to swap the meaning of both logos (one of the reasons being that is was weird that the official only use logo was a subset of the public one). The official logo guidelines still show that the bottle version still exists and is reserved for official use.

So it's not that the bottle version "was effectively superseded", it simply was not the correct logo to use anymore. Joghurt42 (talk) 11:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Categories: