Does Kubuntu really need to be it's own distro?
senectus at gmail.com
Thu Jun 16 04:57:55 UTC 2005
On 6/16/05, Peter Garrett <peter.garrett at optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 11:31:03 +0800
> "Senectus ." <senectus at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Why is it being classed as it's own distro?
> > Surely Ubuntu, Kubuntu and all the users in general would be a great
> > deal better off if support/repositories etc were condensed into one..
> > after all it's ONLY a slightly different GUI.
> > It disturbs me to see even distro watch counts it separate:
> > http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=kubuntu
> > Forking is good in some situations (xorg) but this is getting
> > ridiculous/pointless...
> Kubuntu is not a fork at all. It uses the same apt-sources etc ... It's more an extension, or an alternative, like installing xfce4 on a base-install Ubuntu system - the only difference I can see is that installing Kubuntu as a stand-alone system is an advantage for a lot of people who want KDE. Really, this is kind of a non-issue.
> I was curious to see what the Kubuntu experience would be like, so I ran
> sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop
> I guess if it was a separate distro this would either be impossible, or break things and require much fiddling about.
> I believe some people are working on an Xfce4 version ( Xubuntu?) This would be great, particularly for users of older hardware. The "one CD to install " thing is also good for people with limited bandwidth, many of whom will buy a cheap CD from a distributor, or wait for official shipit CDs.
I understand this, as this was how I did the install, but because we
have split the mail list, split the irc channels, split the web sites,
now the rest of the world is starting to see kubuntu as a separate
distro.. ie ; http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=kubuntu
If this "image" is kept up the kubuntu distro runs the risk of
becoming further "forked" just because of public perception.
I'd go as far as to say we should drop the name "Kubuntu", for
starters it's not even a real word.. and as you mentioned it's
encouraging further perversion of the word/name/brand such as
For that matter does "Canonical" allow the adaptation and "perversion"
of it's trademarked name "Ubuntu"?
Right now it might not seem a big issue.. but as time goes on and
Ubuntu grows in recognition and popularity the problems damage will
become accumulative.. like a snowball...
Ubuntu Hoary 5.04
Our OS who art in CPU, LINUX be thy name. Thy programs run, thy
syscalls done, In kernel as it is in user!
More information about the ubuntu-users