Ubuntu: "We're not Linux"

[bra|10n]

... I suspect that sometime between now and 2012 he will probably drop the infrastructure support as well. When that occurs I feel confident that others will step in and help, and that Kubuntu will move upstream to Debian. This forum is as much about KDE as it is Kubuntu (that's what the "K" stands for) and its mission won't change.

Absolutely agree. But I'd advocate the move to occur sooner rather than later.

I chuckled when I read a irc snippet from [RIDDELL] proposing to poach Pino, suggesting the time was right to pull him into the Kubuntu fold. Thinking they could meet him a@Debian HQ for a little arm-twisting and quick upstream proposal

[MoonRise]

Kubuntu always here. No need to change unless they do falter, which will not happen. So, kubuntu it is. They keep up with KDE perfectly well and the way I like it. As soon as 12.04 is out, I'll install. As soon as 12.10 is out, I'll install. nuf said.

[claydoh]

. I suspect that sometime between now and 2012 he will probably drop the infrastructure support as well. When that occurs I feel confident that others will step in and help, and that Kubuntu will move upstream to Debian. This forum is as much about KDE as it is Kubuntu (that's what the "K" stands for) and its mission won't change.

Why do you suspect that? And what about Xubuntu, Edubuntu, and any project using launchpad?

[claydoh]

I agree with you, but when Canonical speak to the market they also speak to the developers. Branding might be one thing, but when I speak to friends who say "PC" when they mean "windows", might have heard of "Linux" but they've never heard Ubuntu. I don't think that it's especially wise to distance yourself from the one brand that upholds the philosophy. If Canonical don't want to be "Linux" they're biting their tail, both towards the devs and the market/branding. This said I also is happy with all that Shuttlesworth contributed with, for Kubuntu. My experience with Ubuntu OS is not what made me keep GNU/Linux but KDE and KFN. I wouldn't complain one bit if Kubuntu went upstream with a real user and developer funded infrastructure, I'd chip in with all I could.

B.R

Jonas

Upstream (Meaning KDE itself) will very likely for political and realistic reasons, not sponsor an official 'KDE' distro. Though the idea is a good one especially as Kubuntu have done early work in the Mobile sector and have a bit more experience with Arm architectures.

[dequire]

I agree. I expect to be using Kubuntu & KDE until I begin drooling on my shirt and can't zip up my pants. But, according to my wife, that could be tomorrow!

Obviously, that's her way of keeping you in line!

[GreyGeek]

Upstream (Meaning KDE itself)....

"Upstream" to me always refers to the distro being forked, not a DE. Thus, Ubuntu was forked from Debian. To go "upstream" of Ubuntu is to go to Debian. KDE is not a distro, obviously.

[GreyGeek]

Why do you suspect that? And what about Xubuntu, Edubuntu, and any project using launchpad?

Because Shuttlesworth is, IMO, cutting costs by reducing expenditures in areas which have no hope of turning a profit for Canonical. That's why, eventually, "infrastructure support" for Kubuntu will also be cut., effectively cutting Kubuntu loose entirely from Ubuntu/Canonical. With no advantage remaining for Kubuntu to stay based on Ubuntu, moving to Debian is a logical choice.

[kubicle]

"Upstream" to me always refers to the distro being forked, not a DE. Thus, Ubuntu was forked from Debian. To go "upstream" of Ubuntu is to go to Debian. KDE is not a distro, obviously.

"Upstream" generally means "where the code/software you distribute comes from".

Debian is "upstream" if you build on their sources, but debian also has several "upstream" sources, as they do not write everything that they distribute. You can usually follow "the upstream path" until you get to the original source, which is definitely "The Upstream" for all downstream projects.

If you distribute KDE software, the KDE project is upstream (even though it's not a distro).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upstrea...e_development)

[woodsmoke]

Luke.......

Trust......

the original source

[GreyGeek]

Luke.......

Trust......

the SOURCE ... absolutely.

I was having speed, hanging and disconnect problems with my RealTek 8188ce wifi chip. I am less than 3 meters from my wireless router but rarely got over 60% signal strength. I have four neighbor who are booming in at nearly 100% signal strength.

I down loaded the rtl8192ce source compiled for the 3.2.0 kernel from the RealTek website.. THen I "sudo su" and then untarred it and moved into the directory that was made. There I issued "make install", according the the readme.txt. Within about a minute I had new drivers for the 3.2.0 kernel. The new driver isn't perfect, because my signal strength is at 96% +- 4%, but there are NO MORE slowdowns, hangs or disconnect problems.

[Kilz]

I suspect that Canonical will keep providing the infrastructure to Kubuntu. I dont think it realistically adds more costs to Canonical because they are already paying for the services for the other buntu's and its probably under some kind of one price for all contract. But even if they dont, Im glad to hear that this distro will remain debian based. Its one of the reasons I use it instead of say fedora. After so many years using Ubuntu, when I switched desktops, at the way things are laid out in the file system and package management remained the same.After the disaster that is Gnome3/Unity I am really enjoying Kde.
But I really dont trust Canonical anymore. The last couple of years the real Canonical has started to show its true self. It is a rather ugly picture imho.

[SteveRiley]

I've had too many bad experiences with the RPM package system in a wide variety of RPM based distros, which is why I prefer distros based on the deb system.

How is it that a choice of package management system can influence the stability of an operating system? I ask this because I'm genuinely curious. The choice of DEB/RPM/whatever would seem orthogonal to the quality of the packages themselves.

Why do you suspect that? And what about Xubuntu, Edubuntu, and any project using launchpad?

Because Shuttlesworth is, IMO, cutting costs by reducing expenditures in areas which have no hope of turning a profit for Canonical. That's why, eventually, "infrastructure support" for Kubuntu will also be cut., effectively cutting Kubuntu loose entirely from Ubuntu/Canonical. With no advantage remaining for Kubuntu to stay based on Ubuntu, moving to Debian is a logical choice.

The logical extension of this notion is that Launchpad will go away. Imagine the hue and cry -- not to mention loss of vast community support -- if that were to happen. Kubuntu is now, like the others Claydoh mentioned, a Launchpad project. And that's not a bad thing.

Matter of fact, I wonder if it would be better to drop all the various *buntu names. There could be some benefit to becoming known as "KDE on Ubuntu." For one thing, it would clear up a lot of the confusion now. And the idea would naturally extend to any DE.

[dequire]

Honestly, if I were Shuttleworth, I would let Kubuntu thrive. There's no advantage to him if it goes away. In other words, he has potential gains (increased users) without any cost to him. Why would anyone in their right mind get rid of Kubuntu given that situation?

[Ole Juul]

Matter of fact, I wonder if it would be better to drop all the various *buntu names. There could be some benefit to becoming known as "KDE on Ubuntu." For one thing, it would clear up a lot of the confusion now. And the idea would naturally extend to any DE.

It would indeed clear up a lot of confusion. Perhaps it would also be an eye opener for those who have not yet experienced the freedom of choice. I'm thinking of Windows users who seem to expect very little of their DE because they get what they get, and they accept that. In fact, now that I think about it, binding the OS and DE into one name is a direct copy of what the big proprietary vendors do. Why is a Linux distro doing that?

[Kilz]

Matter of fact, I wonder if it would be better to drop all the various *buntu names. There could be some benefit to becoming known as "KDE on Ubuntu." For one thing, it would clear up a lot of the confusion now. And the idea would naturally extend to any DE.

The only problem is that may lead some people who dont understand the different desktops on Linux (linux newbies) wondering if they will have to deal with some of the questionable Ubuntu inclusions like "Unity".