OSNews

Man, your post was hilarious. Nice one! :-D

Note: I'm assuming that you're not being serious (lol - if you are, you should seek help) but I responded as if you were, just in case. :-D

"Although somewhat akin to Debian's stable, unstable, and experimental"

First, you missed out the "Testing" repository, but more importantly, how is it even remotely similar? Having a separate repository for development is standard practise, and is nothing special. To give just two examples: before Fedora, RedHat had RawHide, and Mandrake has the Cooker.

"Fedora becomes to RedHat, what Debian is to Libranet, Lindows and Xandros."

Perhaps, in time. Debian's commercial offshoots dwindle to insignificance when compared to the projcet itself, whereas with Fedora and RedHat the relationship is (for now) the other way around. In addition, Debian is owned and controlled by no-one save its development community, whereas Fedora is effectively owned by RedHat and they have simply opened the development process to outsiders without relinquishing their control. People may argue over whether or not this is an important distinction, but it nonetheless is a clear difference between the two distributions.

"Fedora now brings a number of hitherto quasi-proprietory RedHat tools into the wide open, esspecially the excellent Anaconda installer"

No. Every component of their distribution was released under an Open Source license prior to the creation of Fedora. No change here.

"1) a common package manger"

They haven't come anywhere close to achieving this yet, they merely stated they are working on it. Wait 'til its done before singing their praises.

"2) a common installer"

As I stated earlier, Debian, the very distribution they ported the installer over to, cannot use Anaconda as their official installer because it doesn't support all the ports/architectures. Progeny have also left it a bit late - the new Debian installer is almost finished.

"3) a common configuration framework"

Again, I'm hopeful, but I'll believe it only when I see it. In addition, they said they hope to achieve this "eventually", so I wouldn't hold your breath at seeing this any time soon.

"Fedora gives us Anaconda which is about as close to a perfect installer as one could ask. With a little alteration it works just as well for Debian as it does for RedHat."

Lol - once again, shame about all those ports/architectures it doesn't support.

"But I must implore all parties involved to seriously consider what it means to our community: the birth of a true standard."

There's no conspiracy here. Make it so that it clearly *is* far superior to any existing solution, and people/distributions will migrate of their own volition. As it stands, they won't, because it's not.

"those involved with LSB should follow the natural flow and embrace the unified Apt and allow .debs into the specification."

The LSB already allows this. To be compliant, a distribution merely has to support RPMs. If they choose to support any other formats on top of that, that's their perogative.

"For Debian developers, this means we must graciously ask them to move to Anacanda."

Lol - please make sure to do it on one of Debian's public mailing lists. The response should be most entertaining, to say the least. Make sure to wear your flameproof suit as you do so, naturally. ;-)

"Together, and with the adoption of Discover, which has already become somewhat of a defacto-standard for hardware detection"

No, it hasn't. RedHat uses Kudzu, for example.