Hi,
(Disclaimer: I still have not read this full thread.)
David Stainton wrote (05 Jun 2014 13:28:21 GMT) :
> I think what Zooko is suggesting is that the Tahoe-LAFS debian
> package be included in the Tails releases.
Thanks for clarifying.
> Now that we have debian packages and a maintainer
... which is great!
> is there any reason not to?
If someone properly integrates Tahoe-LAFS withing Tails (including
patching tails-persistence-setup, design doc, and whatever nobody has
thought of yet), then I'm happy.
I'm yet to see a branch that implements this, and that we can check
out and test. Also see
https://tails.boum.org/contribute/merge_policy/, particularly the
"Documentation is not optional" section.
I'm wondering whether, maybe, the best first step would be to add
a page about Tahoe-LAFS in our documentation, that gives an overview
of the pre-requisites (Tails installed with Tails Installer,
persistent volume configured) and needed additional steps (I guess:
have tahoe-lafs installed at every boot with the "Additional software
packages" feature, make the right directories persistent, use it),
pointing to the relevant documentation pages.
Then, it's easy for anyone interested to try out, and while early
testers give it a try, you can work on integrating Tahoe-Lafs within
Tails, which is now the main blocker to install the software by
default, from my PoV. And the branch that does the integration already
has the user doc ready, it just needs to drop the bullet point about
adding tahoe-lafs to the list of "Additional software packages".
But if someone feels bold enough to try and do it all in one single
iteration, well, I'm happy too.
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
