SimplyMEPIS, a very popular desktop Linux,
is going to change back to using Debian Linux for its core from Ubuntu. In March of 2006, MEPIS founder Warren Woodford, decided to switch to Ubuntu from Debian for the next version of SimplyMEPIS, version 6.0. The plan was to use Ubuntu 6.06 LTS (Long Term Service), a.k.a. Dapper Drake, as MEPIS' foundation. Things have changed.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-02-17
That might not happen with Ubuntu but I think some of the other debian based distros should try to do this. Ubuntu is too damn big, its gotten to the point where if you see some kick ass revision of another distro come out you see like 500 different posts of people singing Ubuntu's praises. I'm an Ubuntu user and I'm probably never going to switch barring a deal with MS, but I don't have to shout my buntuphelia from every rooftop. Anyway I though it was obvious that Dapper doesn't get much more than security updates, I think that's been clear since release. Ubuntu isn't Debian, it's goal is to release a new version every six months, dapper was for those who don't need the latest and didn't want to upgrade every six months. I do think that Ubuntu should think about fixing this issue as doing a refresh every six months is getting annoying (not really I find it exciting since they usually add some pretty cool things, and I like to be surprised with the new artwork).
Member since:2005-07-17
the Ubuntu 6 month cycle is a good trade off between the lingering "always updated, never finished" of Debian unstable and the box & bow then no more updates for years that Red Hat does. I think the 6 month cycle is starting to have the effect of pushing the maintainers to tidy up projects to a usable state in time for the Ubuntu release. Keeping the calender as much as possible helps train developers and users to work predictably, without trying to tell them what to do. Project like Debian Unstable are always held back by the slowest person to commit updates. Ubuntu is about drawing a line in the sand and dealing with it.
Member since:2005-07-02
I'm pretty sure Ubuntu devs send upstream patches, so they *do* help strengthen Debian...
Member since:2005-07-24
"""
One could take a contrary view that rather than employ resources to develop Mepis and Ubuntu separate from the Debian "base", that instead, these same resources be employed to strengthen Debian and abolish the idea of fragmented inheritance.
Consolidate resources (time, devs, money)...
"""
I've often thought the same about hemoglobin in red blood cells. Rather than fold into that complex, confusing shape that it does. Why doesn't it just stretch itself lengthwise and form the longest protein that it can? That would be better, wouldn't it?
Member since:2005-07-13
I've often thought the same about hemoglobin in red blood cells. Rather than fold into that complex, confusing shape that it does. Why doesn't it just stretch itself lengthwise and form the longest protein that it can? That would be better, wouldn't it?
Dude, normally I find your posts are well articulated and argued but, come on... I mean seriously, as far as ironic analogies go, don't you think this is a bit over the top?
Member since:2005-07-12
Member since:2005-10-12
No, it wouldn't. A protien molecule's functionality is in part determined by its folding geometry.
Member since:2006-09-27
Member since:2006-09-22
The goal of the debian to be "the universal operating system". debian is a mouldable "substance" that can transform to anything you want.
Currently, I'm using it as my desktop system. our company uses it as servers and somebody embed it to somewhere while others distros use debian as a base.
If debian changes to desktop oriented, we lose so much things. Also debian serves as a "high profile" distro for old school people (or hardcore or you name it). I for one don't like ubuntu or whatever distro that uses major gui tools for everything because I write my config files, I read man pages and I like to struggle with my PC and the general result is a system which works in the way I like most.
If I need to polish my distro I can do it from top to toe. If I don't, I use icewm or no Xwindow system. If I want something special I can use vanilla kernel with any patchset. You cannot do it in suse for example.
So, debian is a huge underlying platform which makes development of desktop distros possible. why convert it to something lesser than itself?
Member since:
2005-07-12
One could take a contrary view that rather than employ resources to develop Mepis and Ubuntu separate from the Debian "base", that instead, these same resources be employed to strengthen Debian and abolish the idea of fragmented inheritance.
Consolidate resources (time, devs, money)...
Focus effort (on the base, not the fragments)....
Reduce Market confusion (the # of distros is confusing)...
That Ubuntu is that popular says, to me, Debian is that solid, otherwise, Mepis wouldn't be going full circle. So why stop at the seeming logic of using Debian as the base. Debian could be more than the base.
I'll bet there are some Debian purists out there saying, thanks for your help now go away! But what is the goal? The Desktop or (to borrow a phrase)
"To have a lot of fun?"
Winning the Desktop would be a lot of fun. It won't happen watching major distros jockey for position like this.