Why can't Debian just pull their heads out of their collective asses just ONCE and standardize the DEP-5 license syntax with SPDX, which the rest of the world is already using? Do they get sexually aroused over having years long discussions about topics with solutions readily apparent in under five minutes to the average third-grader?

Also, how do they stay relevant with such an absurdly high positive correlation between authority within the project and unwarranted condescension towards anyone inquiring about how to catalyze a change in policy or procedure?

Seriously, if I wanted to be insulted thrice within every sentence and treated like a self-evident waste of skin and air, I'd go spend time with my family! Arghhh!

debian is kind of well known for moving like a tortoise. but the result only seems to usually have one issue.

you pretty much always have to compile a fresh kernel to get alot of newer driver support.

but the end result is that their system doesnt break much.

bleeding edge or stable. don't know what a dep5 license syntax is though :P

so uh..
why is this a relevant issue ? You've peaked my curiosity.

for building software systems and determining which of the 5 packages in linux arent't gpl ?

@MadMadMadMrMim I help out packaging a fair number of FOSS projects for Debian-based distros. One of the more onerous aspects of it is properly declaring the licensing for all files in the source tarball. SPDX is the current widely-accepted standard for license declarations and provide common-sense syntax for dealing with things like license exceptions, disjunctive/conjunctive compound licenses, etc. Demonstration:
Files: foo bar
License: GPL-3.0+

Files: baz
License: GPL-3.0+ WITH Autoconf-exception-3.0

Files: debiansucksafatlowerordermammalsreproductiveorgan
License: GPL-3.0

Following the SPDX spec, for such a package I can include a single copy of the GPL-3.0 license header, plus standalone copies of each exception.

However Debian (using a standard that they published a dozen years ago) requires three copies of the GPL3 header, with the various exceptions stuffed into the middle of. It's just a lot of extra work for no reason is all.

so your role is specifically packaging software ? this actually is frequently performed enough to make this extremely annoying ?

I only ask because while machine readable is good in general so long as it remains human readable in some cases, like this one, just seems like a strange thing to place alot of emphasis on twice now.

are you a bot or are we all insane ? or are you copy and pasting from a pre-prepared document ?

because i'm just responding. turing testing you all as much as possible.

because i'm just responding. turing testing you all as much as possible.

There really are enough Linux distributions that could use your devotion.
It doesn't have to be Debian.

@Oktokolo but Debian is sooo awesome as a base !

@MadMadMadMrMim
They got a lot of manpower, so their repo is well maintained.
But they don't feature rolling release or the fine grained control of a source-based distribution like Gentoo.
And Gentoo is technically the better base for building distributions. They just are somewhat understaffed...

@Oktokolo building as in creating and deploiyijg not continuous source integration.