[Grml-devel] how about supported and unsupported grml flavors

[Walter Haidinger]

Hi!

Just something for the grml developers to think about:
How about splitting grml into supported and unsupported flavors?

The supported flavor would be the current one (grml-medium).
This would let the grml developers focus on the grml core and
lift them from the burden of testing all the packages (the main
reason for dropping former grml-full, right?).

The unsupported flavor would be the former 700MB grml-full,
built from grml-live for convenient download but without
further time-consuming testing by the grml devel team, i.e.
grml-medium with lots of subsequent apt-get installs.

Bug reports would be only accepted for supported grml,
like OpenBSD that only accepts reports for GENERIC kernels
or Linux for untainted.

Yes, I know there is grml-live, but if people would just
silently build their ISOs themselves instead of looking
for downloads, the mailing-lists would have been quiet
after the 2011.12 release, right?

Now, what I'm certainly missing here is the amount of work
required for the package selection of the larger grml flavors.

I think that the supported/unsupported flavor approach would
satisfy both the developers (less package testing, more time
to work on grml internals) and the users (have a well-tested
grml core as well as a rich package set by default).

Regards,
Walter