Whenever I scroll a post down all the content disappears.
So I have to post twice, sorry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbmj
'owning' a fork seems like a lot of work when they could just pick a stable base (such as debian or centos) and build on top of that.
|
The issues are going to be more subtle. FIRST switches back and forth between static IP and DHCP. Things like 'Gnome network manager' won't play well with that universally. Then there's going to be the introduction of interface changes that might be adverse to FIRST's needs that a stable base can change without a second thought.
At some point when you start bundling up specific versions of things with specific requirements you are as much a fork of Ubuntu as Mint. We could discuss where that point is at length, but I suspect that point becomes more cogent when your organization has specific requirements and won't comply with the changes (ether immediately or ever). At that point there is autonomy involved.
Annoyingly I can blind type and it appears when I click save...so:
1. I support using Linux because it means that it removes the licensing issue Microsoft/OSX introduces on the team's end.
2. I support using Linux in the sense that it likely means more open code base.
3. However, I was just the CSA in Mount Olive and I worry that asking people to downgrade and upgrade packages is going to be a bit more work than asking people to limit the cameras to 320x240x15fpsx50% compression.
Even with lots of shell / Python to reduce the interaction. So realistically I think FIRST should have version control on everything that might impact them so their QA is more thorough.