[Wolves] Ubuntu Derivatives

[Peter Cannon]

On Tuesday 15 August 2006 12:08, Simon Morris wrote:

> I think Peters point was (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that Debian
> and SUSE manage to package both KDE and Gnome (and n other desktop
> environments/window managers) into a single distribution. Why do we have
> Ubuntu for Gnome and Kubuntu for KDE.

Hooray! sort of, your getting my drift, I couldn't give a toss how many 
versions are available actually, Ubuntu is not my main choice so it doesn't 
affect me. You've hit the nail on the head but I suppose the original 
question should have been "Parts A & B"

> The answer here is IMO that Canonical did the right thing by
> concentrating on a smaller set of packages than Debian for their initial
> release. They only included Gnome in the main release as it's a small
> set of goals to complete.

This answers part A

> There is a lot of merit in this approach but it does mean you are
> excluding people who want to use alternative environments.
>
> Canonical also mastered the art of community building and they now have
> a vibrant set of derivatives offering the alternatives.

Part B Yes I see that as well and seems sensible to me, soooooo under the 
banner of Ubuntu community would it be better to have;
UBUNTU
---------------->KDE users.
---------------->Christian users.
---------------->Myth users.

Now that might be picky or even purely semantics I just think it would be 
cleaner. The funny thing is when I looked at Ubuntu-Lite the venom they got 
from Ubuntu users was amazing  everything from "How dare you use the Ubuntu 
logo" to "This is a waste of time". Linux is a funny game just asking a 
simple question gets hackles up :)

-- 
Regards
Peter Cannon
www.cannon-linux.co.uk

"There is every excuse for not knowing
there is no excuse for not asking"