[ubuntu-studio-devel] Elementary OS

Jimmy Sjölund jimmy at sjolund.se
Thu Sep 3 10:19:39 UTC 2015

On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 11:30 AM, ttoine <ttoine at ttoine.net> wrote:

>> Actually we could host on our own if we wish.
> Ok, didn't know that !

That might give us some freedom and advantages but also other
disadvantages. Like cost and more maintenance.

>> True. How do Xubuntu do their stuff? They seem to have more, like
>> brochures and stickers.
> Like ubuntu-fr or other local user groups, they have an agreement and
> created a non profit organization. And the more Canonical is growing, the
> more it is difficult to get such agreements now.

However, Ubuntu Studio is still an official distribution so I think it
should not be impossible. I could be wrong though.

> *About refreshing Ubuntu Studio look'n feel:*
>  - Change the logo will not help. We can "flat-ize" it you want like the
> current Ubuntu logo, or like a lot of logos at the moment. But we should
> keep it like that.

I agree. Maybe some refining for 16.04 but otherwise I think it looks damn
good in the different versions.

>  - We need a new website, with a simple and bright theme, pleasant to read
> and responsive. And if possible, we should blog more about our ecosystem,
> so people can see that the project is active.

Ongoing. I plan to do a quick overhaul of the web site to make it
responsive, and maybe some other fixes if suggestions come in and they are
easy enough to do. Then a major overhaul for 16.04.

>  - Again, I don't care too much about the look'n feel of US,  until it is
> simple and pleasant to use. I think that what we can do better than what we
> have today:
>   + Elementary OS is more like Mac os X, simple, nothing to tweak, focused
> on use, needs very low resources
>   + Mint (Cinnamon) is more like Windows, with customization, but more
> heavy
>   + Unity is the default Ubuntu desktop, it would make US closer to
> Ubuntu, and is now very mature and stable
>   + XFCE, Mate, etc. are looking old fashioned (I prefer Mate over XFCE,
> by the way) but are still popular with many users

These are mostly personal views people have. I don't like either Max OS X
or Windows desktops. I only have older hardware and want to keep the DE out
of it as much as possible. I would still want to do that with a brand new
computer. I want it to do the audio/video stuff I do, not be shiny and hace
fancy swooshing menus or what not. Other people do however, and they should
be able to install whatever DE they think fit their purpose the best.

Sure, Unity would make US more like vanilla Ubuntu, but XFCE makes US more
like Xubuntu which is not a bad thing. You can get support on certain areas
from both the Xubuntu community and xfce community. With Unity it's "just"

To make Ubuntu Studio look more modern, if that's what we are aiming for
and can agree what "modern" looks like, I think that would be possible to
create within xfce.

>  -> on a look'n feel point of view, why maintain a custom dark theme ? why
> not having a basic bright theme, or any light blue theme, and a simple
> white background with the blue logo? This way we don't focus too much of
> our time on that, and can work on more important stuff (doc, forum
> answering, fixing what's under the hood, ...)

Agree, or perhaps if we have the resources to provide one dark and one
light theme. Myself, I try to set everything to Solarized theme anyway.

> *About technical aspects:*
>  - We have few contributors and they are not full time. So maybe we should
> focus on LTS, provide backports when needed (ex: latest version of Ardour
> in 14.04), and intermediate installers.
>  - We should not focus on short term support versions of Ubuntu.
>  - Do you agree with this idea ? or is there a real interest to support
> short term versions ?

Sort of. I think it's good to have the inbetween releases to try out things
but focus on LTS. Until the team and community is bigger.

> *About US website(s):*
>  - If we redo a brand new website, do you think it could be interesting to
> have our own forum and doc ? Maybe it would be better to have everything in
> one place to create an effective community, than to have everything split
> over many websites like today.

No. Why would we do that? There is a lot of advantages to get help on the
Ubuntu forum no matter if it's Ubuntu Studio or other flavours. You go to
one forum and find the answers there. To move away I think it would make it
harder for people to find help and there are several helping out with the
Ubuntu Studio questions who are not part of the US team or in IRC. We might
lose their contributions breaking out to a new forum. And then we would
need to maintain the forum itself and I have managed several forums before.
It's a hassle. There's a reason I have decommissioned them all.

A consistent structure and instructions on where to find help on the
different channels I think is the way to go. Even if we pulled everything
into our own server it would still be several instances to look in: wiki,
forum, help docs and tutorials, etc.

> Please, be sure that the aim of this thread is not to kill Ubuntu Studio
> but to find fresh & new ideas to achieve this idea: "*it should be easy
> to produce Multimedia with open source software*".
As you were there in the beginning, what was the thinking around the
questions we have been discussing in this thread then? Why was it based on
Ubuntu? What was the vision? How did it become an official Ubuntu
distribution? Why didn't you chose to do it by ourselves like ABC Studio or
similar? I think that maybe looking back on the vision from the start can
givs us some feedback on why och where to go?

/Jimmy (who's lunch break is about over and no food eaten yet..:P )
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-studio-devel/attachments/20150903/5e91716b/attachment.html>

More information about the ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list