Objections to religiously-themed Ubuntu remixes

[WinterMadness]

theres absolutely no need for any religious distro.

you can install anything you want, and if theres an immoral site blocker, then that defeats the entire purpose.

[lisati]

theres absolutely no need for any religious distro.
huh?
<friendly teasing>And there's no need for a "secular" edition either</friendly teasing>
If our Buddhist friends want to organize a distro that meets their needs, good on them!

[Sxeptomaniac]

huh?
<friendly teasing>And there's no need for a "secular" edition either</friendly teasing>
If our Buddhist friends want to organize a distro that meets their needs, good on them!

I agree. Just because it's not "necessary" doesn't mean some people can't create specialized distributions for fun. If nothing else, it highlights one of the things that makes Linux my preferred OS: The whole point of Linux is choice, so good for them for choosing to do something new with it.

[jonathonblake]

theres absolutely no need for any religious distro.

You have forgotten the function of the electronic monks.

jonathon

[dragos240]

This is stupid.

[jasballz]

This is stupid.

ok

[dragos240]

This is stupid.

Actually, let me rephrase that. I don't see the point in ANY religious OS. It doesn't make sense. Computers started out for scientists, for doing work, then for the every day people, for doing work, and now for everybody, to do work, and play. But not for practising a religion. If you want to do that, read whatever holy book (if any), or just do what you want. Sure, you CAN make a religious OS, and I'm not going to stop this, but for a whole OS devoted solely on religion? Please.

[aysiu]

This may end up getting locked anyway if the other staff members think the discussion will go nowhere, but I thought it appropriate to move objections to Buddhist Edition to their own thread, so the Buddhist Edition people can be left alone to do their own thing in their own thread.

By the way, this has already been discussed ad nauseum:
Endless debates about religious derivatives of Ubuntu (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=233375)
Ubuntu Religion (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=866904)

And... Ubuntu and Linux Derivatives (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1112713)

Here are my thoughts on the matter:
What’s the point of Ubuntu remixes? (http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntucat/whats-the-point-of-ubuntu-remixes/)
Ubuntu religious editions controversy: it’s all in the name, folks… (http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntucat/ubuntu-religious-editions-controversy-its-all-in-the-name-folks-2/)

[saulgoode]

When Free Software speaks about the "freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public...", it isn't really specified what constitutes an improvement. My assumption has always been that this judgment is left to the person improving the program and the reason for considering it an improvement is inconsequential.

[jbruced]

One word,

FREEDOM!

(then a few more)

ANYTHING ANYONE wants to do is OK!

Anything YOU don't want to use, YOU don't have to.


Done.

[jbruced]

When Free Software speaks about the "freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public...", it isn't really specified what constitutes an improvement. My assumption has always been that this judgment is left to the person improving the program and the reason for considering it an improvement is inconsequential.

What he said better than me.

[aysiu]

Here's a little FAQ.

Why are people creating remixes? I don't see the point.
Some people like their own set of default packages instead of what vanilla Ubuntu gives as defaults. If they are demonstrating to a specialized audience (especially an audience with a slow internet connection or not a lot of RAM) or doing deployments to multiple machines, this customization can come in handy.

You don't need to see the point, anyway. Only the people making the remixes have to see the point.

This is so divisive. Wouldn't their efforts be better put into improving Ubuntu?
Not necessarily. I've made a remix, and it just involved making some configuration file tweaks for workarounds and shifting out some packages for others. How would those efforts have improved Ubuntu? Ubuntu doesn't want to change to my default packages. Ubuntu does not need to make those workarounds--they need to fix bugs those workarounds deal with in the meantime.

But couldn't this all be accomplished with just a script?
Why is creating a script easier? Have you used Remastersys? Once your Ubuntu is customized the way you want it, just click on Remastersys, and it creates the .iso for you. How much easier does it get than that? Not all of us have the programming expertise to write scripts.

And, as mentioned before, if you're using the live CD to demonstrate to a niche audience or if the audience has a slow internet connection or very little RAM, a script will not be helpful.

That FAQ should apply to both religiously- and non-religiously-themed Ubuntu remixes.

Bottom line: don't like 'em, don't use 'em. Like 'em, use 'em.

[jbruced]

Bottom line: don't like 'em, don't use 'em. Like 'em, use 'em.

+1 again

[Sublime Porte]

Linux is free software, this means people are free to make a religious themed distribution or a dragon themed distribution or an education themed distribution, or a distribution specific for their magazine or a distribution just for cloning hdd's, or a distribution.... ad infinitum.

Anyone who objects to any themed distribution of Linux objects to Linux itself, and the core principles of the free software movement.

A few other points to consider: Religious (or any other) themed distributions bring more people on board, who might not ever hear about Linux through other channels. So objecting to those distributions means objecting to new people hearing about and trying Linux.
Pretty much all distributions, Ubuntu included, are derivatives of other distributions. Why do we need a "human themed" remix of Debian?

[SLEEPER_V]

Actually, let me rephrase that. I don't see the point in ANY religious OS. It doesn't make sense. Computers started out for scientists, for doing work, then for the every day people, for doing work, and now for everybody, to do work, and play. But not for practising a religion. If you want to do that, read whatever holy book (if any), or just do what you want. Sure, you CAN make a religious OS, and I'm not going to stop this, but for a whole OS devoted solely on religion? Please.

Funniest and most self defeating post ev4r. You disprove your point with your own argument. Scientist + work -> reg. people + work -> reg. people + work and play. Its called the evolution of a product. Take the internets. Geek experiment -> national security -> commercial communication -> lolcats.

Products are for whatever people find a use for them, especially open source free stuff.

[Therion]

theres absolutely no need for any religious distro.
It's not really up to you to decide what's needed in this regard, is it now?

[Veteropinguis]

As I see it, religious Ubuntu is philosophically the same as Ubuntu Studio, or this: http://ubuntuforums.org/group.php?groupid=537

I can see where it would definitely have its uses. For example, I took an online AP US History class this year, and found out that my teacher is going to be teaching at a missionary school in Mexico very soon. (He's also going to keep running the online class. Guy's got a lot of energy.) Now, while he's going to be teaching in a perfectly nice place a bit south of Mexico City, we can safely assume that missionaries generally don't make much money, and this is a private school. The school my teacher is going to be working at could save a ton of money by switching to Ubuntu -if it doesn't run it already- and a religious-themed Ubuntu would be great for that purpose. It would make the switch more appealing. The families might then also consider installing Ubuntu based off of their positive experiences with the computers at the school.

I would have been very happy if I'd found a classical music-based Ubuntu remix, one that came with some music player preconfigured to have a 'composer' option open (maybe even fields for conductor, orchestra/quartet/performing group, soloist, opus number...ah, it's good to dream) and a lot of Internet radio stations set up, links to classical music resources, classical music sound scheme, classical music-related backgrounds, etc. (I don't know much about computers so apologies for any amateurish phrasing.) I don't see the difference, philosophically, between that and religious Ubuntu.

Also, OP, are you objecting to religious Ubuntu or Christian Ubuntu? If a bunch of Taoists or Rastafarians or Wiccans wanted to make a religious Ubuntu remix to reach out to members of their religion, would you object? Or are you objecting to Jesus-based Linux?

[juancarlospaco]

theres absolutely no need for any religious distro.
you can install anything you want, and if theres an immoral site blocker, then that defeats the entire purpose.

theres absolutely no need for any Ubuntu distro.

you can install anything you want, and if theres an *BSD or OpenSolaris, then that defeats the entire purpose.

:lolflag::lolflag::lolflag:
seriously ---> YOU ARE WRONG

[Giant Speck]

What are those religious people going to do next?

Erect religion-specific buildings? Write religion-specific books? When will it end?!?

[dmizer]

Closed for review.

Edit:
Per the Code of conduct (http://ubuntuforums.org/index.php?page=policy):
Please remember that these forums are inclusive of ALL people, and we strive to maintain accessibility to everyone.
This includes people who wish to make religious based distributions.

I'm leaving this closed. It's not yours, ours, or anyone's place to decide if religious based releases of Ubuntu are needed or not needed.

[KiwiNZ]

This thread is contrary to the COC in several ways

Closed