8 ms·

Insane effort. This sounded like a pipe dream just a couple of years ago. Congrats to everyone involved, especially to those who drove the effort.

Joel_Mckay 2y ago
The Debian group is admirable, and have positively changed the standards for OS design several times. Reminds me I should donate to their coffee fund around tax time =3
- alfiedotwtf 2y ago
  Exactly! I’ve said it many times and I’ll repeat it here - Debian will be one of the few Linux distros we have right now, that will still exist 100 years from now. Yea, it’s not as modern in terms of versioning and risk compared to the likes of Arch, but that’s also a feature!
  - walrus01 2y ago
    It's quite easy to run Debian unstable (sid) if you want a more risky approach to having the newest of every package.
    - cess11 2y ago
      Commonly these days you can also add specific repos for the things you want to be more on the edge. Then there are some tools one might install manually, at the moment I remember doing it with fzf.
      - sgarland 2y ago
        Yep, I do this for a few tools. Though apt-key deprecation still hasn’t been universally accepted, so that’s always a minor annoyance to deal with.
      - presbyterian 2y ago
        Flatpak is also a great option for apps you might want to be more up-to-date than Debian provides in their package manager.
  - roenxi 2y ago
    > Debian will be one of the few Linux distros we have right now, that will still exist 100 years from now. It'd certainly be nice, but if you've ever seen an organisation unravel it can happen with startling speed. I think the naive estimate is if you pick something at random it is half-way through its lifespan; so there isn't much call yet to say Debian will make it to 100.
    - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
      Indeed, it was sad when they ended the FreeBSD based Debian project due to a lack of interest. I don't think traditional von Neumann architecture will even be around in 100 years, as energy demands drive more efficient designs for different classes of problems. =3
    - Y_Y 2y ago
      > I think the naive estimate is if you pick something at random it is half-way through its lifespan; so there isn't much call yet to say Debian will make it to 100. This doesn't strike me as a strong argument. That naive estimate (in whatever form[0]) is typically based on not knowing anything else about the process you're looking at. We have lots of information about Debian and similar projects, and you can update your estimate (in a Bayesian fashion) when you know this. Given that Ian Murdock started Debian 31 years ago I think more than 100 years is a very reasonable guess. [0] see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect
      - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
        Arguably, there is already the continuous package deprecation process that often leads to unpopular projects getting culled in the next upgrade. In a way, Flatpak/Snap/Docker was mitigations to support old programs on new systems, and old systems with updated software no longer compatible with the OS. Not an ideal solution, but a necessary one if folks also wanted to address the win/exe dominant long-term supported program versions. If working with unpopular oddball stuff one notices the packages cycle out of the repositories rather regularly. =3
      - OrderlyTiamat 2y ago
  - vbezhenar 2y ago
    I feel more safe using Arch, compared to Debian. Debian adds so much of their patches on top of original software, that the result is hardly resembles the original. Arch just ships original code almost always. And I trust much more to the original developers, than Debian maintainers.
    - palata 2y ago
      > And I trust much more to the original developers, than Debian maintainers. Then that's a good reason not to use Debian indeed. Whatever the distro you choose, you give your trust to its maintainers. But that's also a feature: instead of trusting random code from the Internet, you can trust random code from the Internet that has been vetted by a group of maintainers you chose to trust. Which is a bit less random, I think?
      - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
        Debian standardized the vetting process for maintainers, validation environments, and shenanigans could be attributed to individual signatures rather quickly. If you ever want a laugh, one should read what Canonical puts the kids though for the role. One could get a job flying a plane with less paperwork... Authenticated signed packaging is often a slow process, and some people do prefer rapid out-of-band pip/npm/cargo/go until something goes sideways... and no one knows who was responsible (or which machine/user is compromised.) Not really random, but understandably slow given the task of reaching "stable" OS release involves hundreds of projects... =3
        palata 2y ago
        Yeah I think that's what I was trying to say. With a distro, you get some kind of validation by maintainers. With unvetted package managers, you just get something from somewhere.
      - vbezhenar 2y ago
        I don't trust in any validation by the maintainers. There's too much code even in small projects. Big projects are oceans of code. Maintainers maintain too much packages to be able to understand even a little bit of changes. So, no, I don't trust it. It would require a specialized team of engineers for every single project to analyze changes in new versions. It just does not happen. Best they can do is to follow developer's instructions to build a binary artefact and upload it somewhere. May be codify those instructions into a (hopefully) repeatable script like PKGBUILD.
- toasteros 2y ago
  I always want to donate more to open source projects but as far as I know there aren't any I can get tax credits for in Canada. My budget is strapped just enough that I can't quite afford to donate for nothing. Any Canadian residents here know of any tax credit eligible software projects to donate to?
  - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
    Depends on where you live, work, and invest. Still, I would recommend chatting with a local accountant to be sure if a significant contribution to a donee qualifies as deductible. Note most large universities will be registered in both the US/Canada. https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/cra-arc/formspubs/pub/p113/p113-24e.pdf https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/cra-arc/formspubs/pub/p113... Best regards, =3

Joel_Mckay 2y ago

The Debian group is admirable, and have positively changed the standards for OS design several times. Reminds me I should donate to their coffee fund around tax time =3

alfiedotwtf 2y ago
Exactly! I’ve said it many times and I’ll repeat it here - Debian will be one of the few Linux distros we have right now, that will still exist 100 years from now. Yea, it’s not as modern in terms of versioning and risk compared to the likes of Arch, but that’s also a feature!
- walrus01 2y ago
  It's quite easy to run Debian unstable (sid) if you want a more risky approach to having the newest of every package.
  - cess11 2y ago
    Commonly these days you can also add specific repos for the things you want to be more on the edge. Then there are some tools one might install manually, at the moment I remember doing it with fzf.
    - sgarland 2y ago
      Yep, I do this for a few tools. Though apt-key deprecation still hasn’t been universally accepted, so that’s always a minor annoyance to deal with.
    - presbyterian 2y ago
      Flatpak is also a great option for apps you might want to be more up-to-date than Debian provides in their package manager.
- roenxi 2y ago
  > Debian will be one of the few Linux distros we have right now, that will still exist 100 years from now. It'd certainly be nice, but if you've ever seen an organisation unravel it can happen with startling speed. I think the naive estimate is if you pick something at random it is half-way through its lifespan; so there isn't much call yet to say Debian will make it to 100.
  - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
    Indeed, it was sad when they ended the FreeBSD based Debian project due to a lack of interest. I don't think traditional von Neumann architecture will even be around in 100 years, as energy demands drive more efficient designs for different classes of problems. =3
  - Y_Y 2y ago
    > I think the naive estimate is if you pick something at random it is half-way through its lifespan; so there isn't much call yet to say Debian will make it to 100. This doesn't strike me as a strong argument. That naive estimate (in whatever form[0]) is typically based on not knowing anything else about the process you're looking at. We have lots of information about Debian and similar projects, and you can update your estimate (in a Bayesian fashion) when you know this. Given that Ian Murdock started Debian 31 years ago I think more than 100 years is a very reasonable guess. [0] see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect
    - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
      Arguably, there is already the continuous package deprecation process that often leads to unpopular projects getting culled in the next upgrade. In a way, Flatpak/Snap/Docker was mitigations to support old programs on new systems, and old systems with updated software no longer compatible with the OS. Not an ideal solution, but a necessary one if folks also wanted to address the win/exe dominant long-term supported program versions. If working with unpopular oddball stuff one notices the packages cycle out of the repositories rather regularly. =3
    - OrderlyTiamat 2y ago
- vbezhenar 2y ago
  I feel more safe using Arch, compared to Debian. Debian adds so much of their patches on top of original software, that the result is hardly resembles the original. Arch just ships original code almost always. And I trust much more to the original developers, than Debian maintainers.
  - palata 2y ago
    > And I trust much more to the original developers, than Debian maintainers. Then that's a good reason not to use Debian indeed. Whatever the distro you choose, you give your trust to its maintainers. But that's also a feature: instead of trusting random code from the Internet, you can trust random code from the Internet that has been vetted by a group of maintainers you chose to trust. Which is a bit less random, I think?
    - Joel_Mckay 2y ago
      Debian standardized the vetting process for maintainers, validation environments, and shenanigans could be attributed to individual signatures rather quickly. If you ever want a laugh, one should read what Canonical puts the kids though for the role. One could get a job flying a plane with less paperwork... Authenticated signed packaging is often a slow process, and some people do prefer rapid out-of-band pip/npm/cargo/go until something goes sideways... and no one knows who was responsible (or which machine/user is compromised.) Not really random, but understandably slow given the task of reaching "stable" OS release involves hundreds of projects... =3
      - palata 2y ago
        Yeah I think that's what I was trying to say. With a distro, you get some kind of validation by maintainers. With unvetted package managers, you just get something from somewhere.
    - vbezhenar 2y ago
      I don't trust in any validation by the maintainers. There's too much code even in small projects. Big projects are oceans of code. Maintainers maintain too much packages to be able to understand even a little bit of changes. So, no, I don't trust it. It would require a specialized team of engineers for every single project to analyze changes in new versions. It just does not happen. Best they can do is to follow developer's instructions to build a binary artefact and upload it somewhere. May be codify those instructions into a (hopefully) repeatable script like PKGBUILD.
toasteros 2y ago
I always want to donate more to open source projects but as far as I know there aren't any I can get tax credits for in Canada. My budget is strapped just enough that I can't quite afford to donate for nothing. Any Canadian residents here know of any tax credit eligible software projects to donate to?
- Joel_Mckay 2y ago
  Depends on where you live, work, and invest. Still, I would recommend chatting with a local accountant to be sure if a significant contribution to a donee qualifies as deductible. Note most large universities will be registered in both the US/Canada. https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/cra-arc/formspubs/pub/p113/p113-24e.pdf https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/cra-arc/formspubs/pub/p113... Best regards, =3