Official status of Kubuntu, KDE (Re: oneline article: "Debian Alliance on The Horizon")

[Ed Cogburn]

Matt Zimmerman wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 11:17:42AM -0400, Ed Cogburn wrote:
> 
>> Jeff Waugh wrote:
>> 
>> > Ed, taking potshots is not helpful to the discussion
>> 
>> 
>> Oh come on, Jeff, you read Matt's response, he doesn't seem to think I'm
>> throwing potshots.  I actually meant it when I said 'no offense'.
> 
> For what it's worth, I do think your tone has been unnecessarily harsh.  I
> simply chose not to respond to it and to address the facts instead.


Hmm, define harsh, because I don't get it.


> 
> So far, the only concrete points you've raised that lead you to believe
> that KDE doesn't meet your personal definition of "official support" are:
> 
> - Less availability of official pressed CDs
> - Distinct branding


Where 'branding' means Canonical == Ubuntu but Kubuntu != Ubuntu, thus
Canonical != Kubuntu, which has been my point all along.  We're back to the
definition of 'official support'.  If that's harsh then maybe that's your
and Jeff's problem, because I *don't* see 'harsh' here.  I've said at least
twice that I understand why Canoncial chose GNOME over KDE, but claiming
Canonical *hasn't* made a favoritism choice when it clearly has, now *that*
is 'harsh'.  :)