Disappointed with Ubuntu Server, could be used by such a wider audience

[Scott Kitterman]

On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:38:53 -0700 Dylan McCall <dylanmccall at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>This thread pokes quite nicely at the idea of an Ubuntu home server
>metapackage to complement the rest of the desktop. I think this could be
>a very edgy move if approached correctly.
>
>First of all, I am amongst those who think this should have nothing to
>do with Ubuntu Server.
>
Excellent.  I've seen people think they could do integration without knowing anything about the thing they were integrating.  Such stories do not typically have a happy ending.

>Now that's out of the way, how about having both a desktop and a server
>preconfigured to detect and talk with each other? For example, new
>desktop users get logins set up on the server for all services at once
>instead of needing to prod it with commands for six hours. The server
>could handle remote calendars for Evolution (a concept which I have yet
>to wrap my own head around), generic file storage. Maybe client side
>scripts could automatically request that it download software to, for
>example, seamlessly have Workrave integrated across all connected
>computers. It could keep its IP known and continually update clients on
>what it is, just in case Internet access is necessary, and keep track of
>connected clients such that it knows certain accounts on various devices
>to all associate with the same user account on itself. (I have a little
>concept bumbling along for a sort of free, distributed mesh-like DNS
>system that relies on trusted hosts - eg: Friends' devices. That would
>be cool!)

Last year I had a serious hardware problem and the only solution was to build and deploy a new box (long story - bad idea on my part got me in a bad spot).  When I started with the parts for the server in boxes it didn't take me 6 hours to set up.

>As something aimed straight at the Ubuntu desktop, this could use Avahi
>from top to bottom to expose services and be automatically configured by
>scripts on clients. þÿMaybe Nautilus could list another Place which for
>the server's public files.
>It would not be just 'vanilla Apache and PHP and MySQL for your web
>development convenience.

Go find the avahi running by default on a server.

>I think that could be a pretty powerful thing. There is a lot of
>software that needs repetitive configuration, a problem which could be
>overcome by a server that complements Ubuntu and is entirely powered by
>autodetection instead of needing convoluted guides and config files.
>
Oh gee let's get rid of all this complexity that is only put there to confuse us is something that's often requested, but harder to do in real life.  Fortunately no one who knows about this stuff should be involved in your project.
>
>I mention that this could be edgy, because right now the non-free
>competition are working really hard on their online services and big
>screen media centres. This sort of thing for Ubuntu would be an
>interesting shot back, encouraging the idea of individual users owning
>single low-power servers like Linutop, hooked up to their routers
>(perhaps placed right below them, or acting as routers themselves) to
>centralize all that stuff. All the devices in one's possession are then
>working on a convenient client-server model. In contrast to the
>competition's centralization, this would be a single personal server
>that can be trusted and that can be customized, has no subscription fees
>and prevents the confusing dilution that occurs when one's identity
>spreads over hundreds of competing online services, which is bound to
>happen as long as we continue to use the current poorly integrated web
>based applications.
>
>Basically, I agree that there should be a project dedicated to a
>pre-configured personal server system, because that would change the
>entire world... but calling it Ubuntu Server would very much limit its
>growing room.
>
The fundamental problem here is unique to neither the sever nor the desktop.  In Ubuntu we are organized around providing a single box to meet a certain use (desktop, server, whatever).  There is no one particularly minding the larger qustion of the next level of system that integrates multiple boxes.

We need such an effort to move thing to another level and while people who understand both desktops and servers need to be involved, it's really a higher order of problem.

Scott K

P.S. The Ubuntu desktop experience is much larger than Gnome.