Ubuntu Studio packages good enough for Ubuntu?

Cory K. coryisatm at nc.rr.com
Sat Dec 15 13:26:53 UTC 2007

Conrad Knauer wrote:
> I was testing apps from the various ubuntustudio packages and I came
> to the conclusion that even if Live CD space wasn't too big a problem
> (I was excluding packages with a JACK requirement but including those
> with just a libqt* dependency), most wouldn't be up to Ubuntu's
> default install standards.  However some little ones that I had tried
> before and liked:
> agave
> gtick
> gnome-specimen
> and some that have gotten positive mentions here before:
> scribus
> inkscape
> Now, of the remainder, I was wondering if any of you would include
> apps from the following nine; I get the feeling they each either fits
> a niche that's too small to justify their general inclusion, or have a
> GUI that's too different, or are generally too difficult to use, etc.:
> kino
> hugin
> beast
> blender
> fontforge
> stopmotion
> hydrogen
> denemo
> pitivi
> Though I thought hugin and stopmotion were probably the two closest to
> meriting inclusion, though still perhaps overly specialty apps;
> thoughts?
> Also, of course, if you would include any from ubuntustudio* that I
> didn't list? :)

I wouldn't put any of it in Ubuntu.

> Finally, a brief question about a package that isn't part of
> ubuntustudio* but has the look of one that should be:
> xaralx

Inkscape covers this.

> Did they ever solve the GPL issue with cdraw?
> http://www.linux.com/articles/59160
> CK

For the most part, what you've listed isn't appropriate for a desktop
focused distro. Like you said "they each either fits a niche that's too

In the end, just use Ubuntu Studio (niche distro) or it's trivial to
grab them yourself on Ubuntu.

There are many more "desktop user" focused apps that would be better to


More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list