Debian 的鬥爭是否導致開發的延遲??

[sendxp]

對岸同胞的翻譯: http://www.freebsdchina.org/forum/viewt ... hlight=ule
原文來自: http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS7543606709.html

真不知道該怎麼說, Debian是我最喜歡的套件, 但開發的速度真的有些慢, 所以有一些部份的server我也轉用Ubuntu...
也許Debian太多平台了吧! 加油 ! Debian !!!


Debian已經行將入墓？

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols 著
Cedar 翻譯
2006年9月22日
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,20 ... X1K0000616

For a while, Debian was the community Linux darling. In its heyday, Debian was known for its strong moral point of view and its outstanding code. Numerous important distributions, such as Linspire, Knoppix, and today's most popular distribution, Ubuntu, have sprung from it. Things have changed.
Debian,這個昔日Linux社區的寵兒，曾以強烈的精神信仰和傑出的代碼而輝煌一時。許多眾多重要的版本都發源於它，如Linspire，Knoooix以及今天最流行的版本——Ubuntu。

Today, Debian is a troubled distribution. In order to get Debian GNU/Linux 4.0, codenamed etch, out the door by its scheduled date of December 4, 2006, Dunc-Tank.org, a group of Debian developers and fans, was formed.
但是今天，Debian已經變的麻煩重重。。為了能在2006年12月4日按時發佈代號為etch的Debian GNU/Linux 4.0，Debian開發者和愛好者們不得不建立了Dunc-Tank.org組織。

Historically, Debian has been notoriously late ever since Debian 1.2 was released almost a decade ago in 1997. So, Dunc-Tank was created to accelerate Debian's development.
事實上自從十年前在1997年發佈Debian 1.2起，Debian就已經因為屢屢延期而變得聲名狼藉。現在通過創建Dunc-Tank以期加速Debian的開發。

Dunc-Tank's membership includes Anthony Towns, the Debian Leader, Steve McIntyre, the assistant to the Debian Leader, prominent Debian developers Raphael Hertzog and Joey Hess, and well-known Debian and Linux kernel developer Ted Ts'o
Dunc-Tank的組織成員包括Debian負責人Anthony Towns,助理Steve McIntyre,卓越的開發人員Raphael Hertzog和Joey Hess以及著名的Debian和Linux內核開發人員Ted TS'o等等。

Dunc-Tank plans to accomplish its mission by raising funds to be used for "financially supporting the volunteers working on managing the release process, allowing them to devote their full attention to that task." Specifically, the group's goal is to be able to raise enough funds to pay "both release managers enough to work exclusively on the release of etch for a month each, having Steve Langasek available full-time during October and Andreas Barth available full-time during November, with the release expected to follow soon after in the first week of December."
Dunc-Tank計畫通過籌集資金來達成這一目標。這些資金將“用來對志願人員管理發佈進程給與資金支援，保證他們已全部精力完成這一目標。”組織的目標是能夠籌集到足夠的資金來保證開發人員在兩個月內能夠全職為etch工作以及Steve Langasek和Andreas Barth能夠分別在十一月和十二月投入他們全部的時間以此力求在十二月的第一個星期後能夠發佈這以版本。

Simple, straightforward, practical, and it has led to calls for the head of the Debian Project, Anthony Towns, to be recalled because he's a member of the Dunc-Tank board.
目的簡單，直截了當而又實用。但是行動卻導致了對領導人Anthony Towns的罷免。原因很簡單——他是Dunc-Tank組織的中心成員之一。

Why? Because Denis Barbier, a relatively new Debian developer, claims that Towns has confused people into thinking that Dunc-Tank is officially supported by the Debian Project. Therefore, Barbier urged via the Debian voting mailing list that Debian developers "make this confusion vanish, and I would like to propose that we answer to the valid question quoted in the second paragraph above by recalling our Project Leader ... and am seeking seconds for this proposal."
這是什麼！原因是新的開發人員Deins Barbier發表聲明說Towns這種行為使人們對Ducn-Tank的性質發生誤解，以為其為Debian官方支援的組織。因此，Barbier通過 Debian投票郵件列表極力號召Debian開發人員“消除誤解，並建議我們通過罷免我們專案領導人來回答在上面第二段提出的問題。”（該問題指的是 Deins Barbier的郵件的第二段。）

Barbier immediately received numerous seconds for his motion.
Barbier的提議立刻得到了大量的擁護。

There were other objections behind this recall movement. One developer, Lucas Nussbaum, said that "experiments have shown that sometimes, paying volunteers decreases the overall participation."
罷免背後還有其他不同的反對意見。如開發員Lucas Nussbaum說“過去的嘗試已經證明，有時給自願人員報酬會降低公眾的參與性。”

Another concern is that paying developers will be bad for Debian. As T'so comments, though, in a Linux.com story on the controversy, "If money were among anybody's primary motivators," then "they probably wouldn't be accepting a grant from Dunc-Tank; they could probably make more money by applying for a job with Google -- or Microsoft."
另一個受到關注的焦點是為開發人員支付報酬會損害Debian。按照T'so在辯論中根據Linux開發經驗的解釋，“如果金錢成為人主要動機，那麼他們很可能將無法從Dunc-Tank獲得滿足而將可能向Google或者微軟求職而獲得更多的錢。”

Others within the Debian community also wonder what all the fuss is about. Matthew R. Dempsky wants to know, for example, "What's so scandalous about the DPL encouraging a timely release?"
其他Debian內部人員也想知道這些人大驚小怪是為什麼。如Matthew R. Dempsky就想知道為什麼對於領導人促進及時發佈新版本的行為有這麼多攻擊和誹謗。

Still other developers are fighting back against the recall movement. Loic Minier, a French Debian developer, said "I am pissed enough by the attitude of some developers that I want to reaffirm support for the elected DPL whatever he does to suppose Debian outside of the project."
還有其他的成員抵制對領導人罷免。Loic Minier,一名法國籍Debian開發人員說道：“對於一些開發人員的態度我感到非常氣憤。我重申我支持領導人在Debian之外所做的一切有利於Debian的行動。”
He then proposed the following counter-proposal: "The Debian Project reaffirms its support to its DPL. The Debian Project does not object to the experiment named 'Duck Tank', lead by Anthony Towns, the current DPL, and Steve McIntyre, the Second in Charge. However, this particular experiment is not the result of a decision of the Debian Project. The Debian Project wishes success to projects funding Debian or helping towards the release of Etch."
然後他也提出了的反方面的建議：“Deibian專案應重申對現任領導的支持。Debian專案不應反對由領導人Anthony Towns 和副領導人Steve McIntyre所開展的Duck-Tank組織。。但這個開發組織並不是由Debian專案官方控制。Debian專案希望能夠促進Debian長期發展或者實現Etch如時發佈。”

Interestingly, Towne has seconded the motion for his own recall, to bring the matter to a decision.
有趣的是，事情的結果是Towne對這場罷免自己的運動做出了讓步。

He wrote, "I'm seconding this because I do think it's a fair question for the project to consider, and to make it clear I don't personally have any problem with being recalled if that's what the project thinks is right and proper. If I'm not DPL, I expect I'll continue doing what I have been: working on dunc-tank.org, working on helping the release team get the release out, poking at the security infrastructure to make sure it keeps behaving itself, and continuing to support other folks who've approached me in the past year where they still want that support. Frankly, I think we're doing great, and I'm not remotely interested in quitting."
他寫道：“我辭職是因為我認為這對於社區是一個實實在在要考慮和解決的問題。只要社區認為這樣是正確合適的，我本身對於罷免沒有任何問題。即使我不在是Debian的領導人，我將會繼續作我所做的事情：為Dunc-tank.org工作，幫助發佈小組發佈新的版本，維護安全機制使其良好運行，繼續在過去親密工作夥伴需要我的地方提供支援。真的，我認為我們合作的非常好！我沒有任何想退出的想法。”

This battle continues to rage on in the Debian lists, but I'm going to leave recording the details of that to others.
在Debian的郵件列表上這場爭論還在無休無止，但是我不再提及其他的一些細節。

Here's my point: The Debian community, instead of rejoicing in a perfectly sensible idea to help get the next version out the door, has instead fallen into a snake-pit of online politics. The result of all this infighting will, of course, be that less attention will be paid to the Etch code.
我的觀點是：Debian社區不是非常明智的去幫助即將到來的下一個版本，卻陷入這場網路上瘋人院般的內部鬥爭中。這場鬥爭顯而易見的結果是無法為Etch(Debian的下一版本)投入全部精力。

As Towne points out, "Given two weeks of discussion for this, two weeks of voting, and the nine week election process, the earliest we'd have a DPL would be the end of December by my count; so assuming this resolution passed and we released on time, we'd be doing so without a DPL [Debian Project Leader]."
就像Towne指出的，“用兩個星期討論，兩個星期投票，然後九個星期選舉，估計我們有一個新的領導人的最早的時間是十二月份末。如果假定這樣決定而且我們能如願按時發佈新版本，我們將是在沒有領導人的情況下完成這一切。”

If this were an isolated incident, I'd be inclined to dismiss it. It's not, though.
如果這事件只是孤立而偶然的，我不會關注它。然而它不是。

On August 28, well-regarded Debian developer Matthew Garrett resigned from Debian because "Debian doesn't really seem to know who or what it's for. Arguments erupt over whether something is a deeply held principle or an accident of phrasing on the website; whether we should release more often or less often; whether free software is more important than our users having functional hardware. And, depressingly, these debates generally seem to turn into pedantic point scoring and insults and yes, I'm probably as guilty as many others in this respect. But it's got to the point where social interaction with Debian-the-distribution makes me want to stab people."
8月28號，著名的Debian開發人員Matthew Garrett辭去了在Debian的職務。用他的話講是因為“Debian完全不知道誰或什麼對它來說是合適的。一些事情是否是涉及到原則的問題還是小事；我們應該發不信版本更頻繁還是跟少一些；！•#￥•#%￥%。所有的這些都將引爆喋喋不休的爭吵。而且讓人鬱悶的是，爭吵往往最後變成學究式的互相爭辯和侮辱。是的，我自己也許和別人沒什麼不同。但是它已經讓我變得想殺人的程度了。

He's not the only developer to get sick of Debian politics coming before Debian development. Scott James Remnant, another Debian developer who has left the fold, recently explained on his blog why he has gone to Ubuntu.
他並不是唯一對伴隨著開發模式而來的決策機制感到頭疼的人。前開發者Scott James Remnat最近在博客上解釋了他為什麼轉投Ubuntu。

Remnant said, "I think that the end of my love-affair with Debian started at Debconf last year where several developers treated those of us who also worked on Ubuntu quite rudely. Someone was attacked for wearing an Ubuntu t-shirt at the conference, while someone else was applauded for wearing a "Fuck Ubuntu" t-shirt. That's where I realized that maybe I didn't have as much in common with these people as I thought I did."
Remnat寫道，“自從去年的Debian開發者年度會議開始，我知道我和Debian的親密無間結束了。在大會上，我和其他的同時在 Debian工作的開發者受到了粗暴的侮辱。一些人因為穿了Ubuntu的體恤衫而受到指責；而另一些人在襯衫上寫著‘Fuck Ubuntu’,他們受到了歡呼和喝彩。那時起我開始認識到，過去我常常認為和這些人有著共同的思想，但現在我知道我們不是同一路人。”

Once more, we see ugly, juvenile politics rearing its ugly head.
再一次，我們看到了醜陋、不成熟的決策機制露出了它醜惡的面孔。

It was more than that, though. Remnant also objects to "Debian considering removing documentation and firmware from the distribution, especially the documentation, was another point I started wondering whether I shared anything in common with the project anymore."
然而不僅僅是這些。。Remnant也反對Debian其他的行為，“Debian正在考慮從發行版中去除文檔和固件。特別是這些文檔，開始讓我考慮是否應該繼續和這個項目共用我的東西。”

Remnant continued, "Call me strange, but I think that one of the fundamental purposes of a Linux distribution is to be useful to its users. If nobody can use the distribution because it doesn't support their hardware, and even if it did, all the documentation has been stripped out; I started to wonder what its aims are. It became increasingly apparent that the only users Debian was considering a priority were its own developer."
Remnant繼續寫道：“這是我很驚訝！我想一個Linux版本最基本的目的就是對它的用戶有用處。如果用戶無法實用它是因為它不支援他們使用的硬體，或即使支援卻不是提供相應的文檔。我開始懷疑它的目的了。Debian唯一考慮的特權用戶只有它自己的開發者。”

So, here we are. We have a Linux "community" at war with itself.
所以，現在我們有了一個以自己為敵的Linux“團體”。

This is a community that in August of 2005 objected to its own founder, Ian Murdock, creating a group of Debian-based companies, the DCC Alliance, to further the operating system because it was at first named the Debian Alliance.
這就是一個在2005年8月發對自己創始人的團體。Debian創始人Ian Murdock想通過創建一個所有基於Debian的版本共同組成的名為“DCC聯盟”組織來促進這個作業系統的進一步發展卻招到反對。原因僅僅因為組織最初的名字叫Debian聯盟。

Enough.
夠了！

Debian has become a distribution whose supporters are clearly more interested in scoring points off each other than creating a serious Linux distribution. It is a group where far too many of its people are far more concerned with moronic minutiae than they are with development.
Debian已經變成了起開發者對互相攻擊而不是發行一個高品質的軟體套間的版本。這個團體的成員越來越多的開始更加關心一些愚蠢的雞毛蒜皮而不再關心他們的開發了。

Is it any wonder that Ubuntu took Debian's old and great code and produced a wonderful distribution from it, when Debian's own developers couldn't cut the mustard?
當Debian的開發者軍心渙散時，對於Ubuntu能過接過Debian的古老而又偉大的代碼來建立一個高品質的版本還有任何疑問嗎？

I think it's clear why Ubuntu rules. Debian's best and brightest left for Ubuntu because there, with a formal organization and a focus on coding instead of petty personal politics, development gets done. In Debian, everything becomes a subject for debate and delay.
我認為對於Ubuntu為什麼成為主流，原因是相當清楚的。Ubuntu取代了Debian的榮譽和輝煌是因為其正式的組織結構以及集中精力于程式開發而不是人們之間的不同的政策政治。這樣開發才能進行。而在Debian，所有的主題都變成了辯論和推遲。

It's possible that Debian may yet rise off its death-bed. Dunc-Tank is part of the medicine it needs to get well. But, unless the patient stops fighting with itself, Debian will continue its decline and die.
當然，Debian可能能過從它的病床上爬起來。Dunc-Tank就是醫治它的藥物之一。但是除非病人能夠停止自殘行為，否則Debian將會不斷的衰落，直到死亡。

If it does die, we'll miss it -- but in Ubuntu and the other Linux distributions that have been based on the best of it, its DNA will live on.
如果消失了，我們失去了它。但是在Ubuntu和所有其他的基於Debian精髓的Linux版本中,它的血統將繼續。

[kahn]

使用Debian 或是 Ubuntu 對我來說都一樣,
要是Debian 真的掛了,多少年後還有誰會記得

[訪客]

Debian是母
Ubuntu是子

母垮了，子尚未長大成人，能否繼續維持該精神，難以預料。
哪能抱持無所謂態度呢？

會覺得難過吧！

[sendxp]

其中也提到有部份開發者已經轉向 Ubuntu project 了.
不管是 Debian or Ubuntu 基於 APT, 都已經符合我的需要了.
當然還是不希望 Debian 倒了. 別忘了, Ubuntu是基於 Debian testing/unstable.

[idealbsd]

既然是开源的就不会依赖与个别的开发者，不喜欢的离开了自然有喜欢的进来，这样也才会保持活力，ubuntu对debian的损益俱在，二者的分裂也是起始即有意谋划之下的产物，个人还是比较赞同joey关于debian与ubuntu的论点
http://kitenet.net/~joey/blog/entry/ubu ... ndump.html

[訪客]

對岸同胞的翻譯:
If it does die, we'll miss it -- but in Ubuntu and the other Linux distributions that have been based on the best of it, its DNA will live on.
如果消失了，我們失去了它。但是在Ubuntu和所有其他的基於Debian精髓的Linux版本中,它的血統將繼續。

we'll miss it 應該翻譯成"我們將會想念它"比較正確

[flybird]

我一直有個疑問 ：： Debian 的老板是誰呢?

我想答案應該是廣大的使用群吧！

可是這個老板似乎是 ｜不付出｜付不出｜管不了事 ｜ 不管事 ｜

該怎麼辦呢？

[sendxp]

不知道 Debain 4.0 能不能如期推出...
Ubuntu 6.10 已經 release 了, 雖然有些人說它仍有 Bug 就 release ...

[Cheung]

Ububtu 似乎步上以前RH, MDK 的錯誤作法 盲目追求新的版本號

debian 的龜毛作法讓 woody , sarge 都成為穩定好用的系統

雖然 stable 在軟體更新上很慢 但是新的不一定就是穩定

我推薦新手入門都是用 stable 實際上帶過的也都不想轉其他版本

用到現在除了自己想用新的 desktop外

能用 stable 就用 stable 管的機器也沒有發生奇奇怪怪的問題

我到認為不能如期出也無所謂

為推出而推出 我寧可等 bug 都除完再放出來 最明顯的例子 MS IE 7

24 小時不到就被抓出漏洞 這不是更丟臉嗎

[granziliao]

在下倒是有一些淺見：
debian 謹慎小心的release cycle的確保持了其所注重的穩定及安全性
但 debian的用途不只是LAMP而己，像是科學運算、桌面應用也是Linux的大項，以我自己為例，GSL(GNU Scientific Library)在sarge的版本己是太舊了，這時我就需考慮要不要跳到其他release cycle比較短的Dist.
我的淺見是，Debian只需選一個好的、穩定的、安全的core system來維護就好了，比如說，把glibc、qt、gtk等定在一個經過驗證己是相當安穩的版本後，讓其他的軟體不必一定要fixed在某一個發行版
像Ubuntu就提供了這種機制(prevu)
如果該軟體升級動作會對系統產生嚴重影響的話，便不會升級，兼顧了使用者對新功能的需求(以GSL為例，最新的1.8才有提供beta function 的inverse)及系統的穩定性(不會升到gcc-4.1，以Ubuntu Dapper為例)

[oxygen]

ubuntu6.10我装了关不了机器，决定转投debian，还是慢一点出的好

[PCMan]

在下倒是有一些淺見：
debian 謹慎小心的release cycle的確保持了其所注重的穩定及安全性
但 debian的用途不只是LAMP而己，像是科學運算、桌面應用也是Linux的大項，以我自己為例，GSL(GNU Scientific Library)在sarge的版本己是太舊了，這時我就需考慮要不要跳到其他release cycle比較短的Dist.
我的淺見是，Debian只需選一個好的、穩定的、安全的core system來維護就好了，比如說，把glibc、qt、gtk等定在一個經過驗證己是相當安穩的版本後，讓其他的軟體不必一定要fixed在某一個發行版
像Ubuntu就提供了這種機制(prevu)
如果該軟體升級動作會對系統產生嚴重影響的話，便不會升級，兼顧了使用者對新功能的需求(以GSL為例，最新的1.8才有提供beta function 的inverse)及系統的穩定性(不會升到gcc-4.1，以Ubuntu Dapper為例)

這點不可能達成，因為 gtk+ 至今從來沒有任何一個版本是穩定的
真要講大概是 2.6 比較穩，從 2.8 之後就爛光了，而 ubuntu 現在
採用的 2.10，仍然是不穩定版本，這樣的系統會穩才真的很奇怪...
2.10 又比 2.8 問題更多，反而越來越不穩，但gtk+新版又提供了一些
相當重要的功能，又不能沒有，若是堅守 2.6，則很多程式都無法使用
所以這也是讓人很為難的..... 事實上 ubuntu 還有針對 gtk+ 打上
自己的 patch，否則之前 gtk+ 2.10 的 "stable" release 裡面
是存在著一些會輕易當掉程式的嚴重 bugs，根本不能用

[PCMan]

不知道 Debain 4.0 能不能如期推出...
Ubuntu 6.10 已經 release 了, 雖然有些人說它仍有 Bug 就 release ...

他們一直都是這樣搞.......
前陣子才有許多老外在回報 ubuntu 6.10 導致音效卡出問題
我自己也碰到了，錯誤回報系統有好幾篇
又之前我也回報過 OpenOffice.org 的錯誤，
似乎也不是只有我遇到，他們也沒有進行相關測試
時間一到，就如期把壞掉的程式當穩定版 release
這點真的讓人感到非常的不高興.....
結果升級之後果然那些問題還是壞的......
我寧願 debian 延遲釋出，也不希望他們像這樣為了趕發行
隨便就把測試到一半的東西丟出來

[訪客]

這點不可能達成，因為 gtk+ 至今從來沒有任何一個版本是穩定的
真要講大概是 2.6 比較穩，從 2.8 之後就爛光了，

為何2.8之後就爛光了呢?? 對 gtk 不熟, 所以滿好奇的.

[kahn]

領了錢不在預定的時間完成工作會很難交代,所以就敷衍了事,就算是有問題也把它推出去,新板本上市可不能Delay. 大概是這樣的心態吧!!