From: Chad Perrin <perrin@...>
Date: 2007-06-12T10:54:50+09:00
Subject: Re: Serious danger of being impressed

On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 10:48:26AM +0900, Benjamin Kudria wrote:
> 
> 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.

Parts of the system are.  Others continue on the same old path of the
original fork.  The fact it "reborrows" good stuff is to Ubuntu's credit,
but does not make it less of a fork.


> 
> 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)

There are some things that are compatible between, say, MS Windows XP Pro
and Debian, too -- but they're even less compatible than a proper fork.


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

Maybe, kind-sorta, except that it's not "a" patch.  If it can be compared
to patches at all, it's a *bloody lot* of patches.

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
MacUser, Nov. 1990: "There comes a time in the history of any project when
it becomes necessary to shoot the engineers and begin production."