From: Benjamin Kudria <bkudria@...>
Date: 2007-06-12T10:48:26+09:00
Subject: Re: Serious danger of being impressed

On Monday, June 11 2007, Chad Perrin wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 04:27:01PM +0900, Dick Davies wrote:
> > Ok, thanks for the advert. Debian has its own problems, but this isn't
> > the place to discuss them.
> >
> > On 11/06/07, Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com> wrote:
> > >Ubuntu is a Debian *fork*.
>
> Uhh . . . what?  I said it was a fork.  I didn't say it was crap.  I'm
> not sure where you're coming from with the hostile tone.
>
> From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_(software_development):
>
>   In software engineering, a project fork happens when developers take a
>   copy of source code from one software package and start independent
>   development on it, creating a distinct piece of software.
>
> From http://wiki.ursine.ca/Fork:
>
>   In the open-source community, a fork is what occurs when two (or more)
>   versions of a software package's source code are being developed in
>   parallel which once shared a common code base, and these multiple
>   versions of the source code have irreconcilable differences between
>   them.
>
> (Note: The commentary about Linux distribution forking in the Jargon Wiki
> is somewhat naive, in terms of its assumptions about the differences
> between Linux distributions.  The key component of forking is
> incompatibility, not whether or not something is composed primarily of
> widely available elements.)
>
> So . . . why does your statement read as though you thought I said
> "Ubuntu is a *crappy Debian fork*!"?  I said nothing of the kind in my
> statement as quoted by you.  I pointed out that Ubuntu and Debian are not
> compatible -- are not, in fact, simply different implementations of the
> same standard, as the previous message seemed to imply.

Well, I have issues with your statement too.

Ubuntu may be a fork, but that's not telling the whole story.

For one, Ubuntu is "re-forked" every 6 months, after every release.  Less of a 
fork, more of a companion code-path.  If that makes any sense.

Secondly, you say "The key component of forking is incompatibility..."
I can personally attest that Ubuntu and Debian are compatible in a number of 
ways (but not all!).  I've used Debian packages in Ubuntu before (and 
vice-versa)

Ubuntu is a downstream version of Debian - it's Debian, with changes, 
re-synced every 6 months.  How about, "Ubuntu is a Debian *patch*". ?

-Benjamin Kudria