[Grml] Grml 2011.12 trolling^W comments from disappointed user(s)

[Ulrich Dangel]

* Paweł azhag Sadkowski wrote [24.12.11 11:18]:

> From my point of view Grml was livecd one of the kind. I did lots of
> advocating, had lots of conversations like "I prefer XYZ", "Look at

Thanks. We highly appreciate that.

> all that tools in Grml, you can do all stuff you do in XYZ and many
> more", "Oh, it really looks nice". My personal motto of Grml was "What
> can't you do?".

I like your motto but that was exactly that problem. We, the members of
the Grml team also had always a problem with what belongs to Grml what
does not. For example does an compiler belong to text tool users/admins?
IMHO no but it may be useful.

As most of the Developers were rarely using Grml we asked ourself ok,
for what usecase would you use Grml and why? And we came up with the
changed/narrowed perspective Installation/Deploymnet & Recovery.

> And then comes 2011.12. Many apps, many tools were removed. Now I
> can't tell the difference between Grml and SystemRescueCD, PLD Rescue
> CD, Repair Is Possible and others. Grml for me lost it's identity,

The identity of Grml is sane default configurations,
ZSH as default shell and flexibility. We have changed the package list
but the rest is still there. 

Want to start arbitrary services at bootup?  Use the service bootparam
Want to install debian packages at bootup? Use the debs bootparam
Want to execute scripts at startup? Use netscript/scripts
Want to remaster Grml or produce your own CD? Use grml-live.
…
I think we are still quite flexible though maybe not have a really
extended package list. But we try to provide all the necessary tools for
the tasks. We explicitly added targetcli to our package list to simplify
iSCSI target support.


> just another rescue live cd. I already twice faced question "Why
> should I use Grml not SystemRescueCD? SRCD has some tools I need, Grml
> doesn't". Those tools were already (re-)added by mrud (one in rc1, so
> it's in final release), but the damage has been done -- one user
> replied "I better stick to distro that already have what I need
> without asking", other won't use Grml until next release. Another
> person actually listed $LONG_LONG_LONG_LIST_OF_REMOVED_TOOLS and asked
> "What can you do with Grml (except grml-debootstrap)?!". I couldn't
> find the answer.

I could find plenty. One example:
http://blog.grml.org/archives/367-Create-a-Grml-ISO-image-with-your-own-ssh-keys-for-password-less-login.html

But i agree, it is a problem if people don't know about the capabilities
of Grml. One difference is for example iSCII/AoE target support. Both
currently AFAIK not present in SRCD. 

But yes focusing on one part allows you to be specialize on it. We also
have puppet as well as mcollective on board for automating purpose.
For a nice start about puppet/mcollective have a look at 
http://sysadvent.blogspot.com/2011/12/day-24-implementing-configuration.html

> Is there any chance that since next release you will change your
> priorities back to <=2011.05 state? 

Highly unlikely.

> Or at least can you add -extended verison of Grml, similar to good old
> -full? Probably I can help with that, if you need some.

Yes we need people stepping up. But please be aware that it is not only
taking care of the package list, we already have GRML_XL in grml-live
but it needs to be tested, taking care of bugs/dependencies problems
etc.

To get started i think the best way to do it is to build GRML_XL on your
own, report problems, test it and provide feedback.

Ulrich