On Sat, 29 Nov 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:

> Found via a discussion by the Debian/kfreeBSD list:
>
> http://blog.steve.org.uk/how_could_you_rationally_fork_debian_.html

I tend to agree with this analysis. I believe it is not even desirable
for upstream aiming at end-users to be packaged and mediated by distros.
Disclaimer: I have pretty unhortodox ideas about what desktop packaging
means, being an admirer of the "drag&drop" bundle model of packaging in
OSX, which we also used in dyne:bolic and puppy linux. It just suits
better the desktop economy to disintermediate the distribution of
software products between upstream and final users. This might have some
important economical implications as well, on the side of sustainability
for software artisans.

Of course for server-based usage is another pair of sleeves, as well for
embedded. The problem with many distributions today is that the server
approach is being applied to all kinds of models, while the free
software movement and the open source markets have grown incredibly
complex and require much more attention to details and even I dare to
say business models. Rest assured that I see Devuan as an effort to make
a stable core that downstream can use in most cases, freely.

More on Devuan's architecture, I really like this blog post
http://lwn.net/Articles/623420/ honestly this is exactly the plan I had
in mind when I finally engaged myself in this adventure, listening to
all the drama going on among friends circles and joning the VUAs. To
make Devuan feasible I believe we should take this as a goal for the
Jessie release and do our best to make it "seamless" to dist-upgrade to
it with a script that we can provide. All packages should be served from
our infrastructure and mirrors.

excerpt quote:

""
Posted Nov 29, 2014 4:48 UTC (Sat) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313)
Parent article: The "Devuan" Debian fork

In theory this should be a trivial fork. If Jesse (and later) continue to
support non-systemd init systems, all this project will be is a competing
build/mirror infrastructure with different package defaults.

It's only when other dependencies start creeping in that there will be a
significant amount of work.

So "all" they should need to do in the next year to get to Devuan 1.0 is to
build a replacement for the Debian infrastructure.

If the people who are poo-pooing the fears of the systemd opponents are
correct, this will remain a fairly trivial fork as far as users are concerned.
They (and Debian) will learn something useful with their attempts to improve on
that infrastructure.
""

ciao

--
Jaromil, Dyne.org Software Foundry (est. 2000)
We are free to share code and we code to share freedom
Web: https://j.dyne.org Contact: https://j.dyne.org/c.vcf
GPG: 6113 D89C A825 C5CE DD02 C872 73B3 5DA5 4ACB 7D10
Confidential communications: https://keybase.io/jaromil