Endless debates about religious derivatives of Ubuntu

[Mimsy]

This is not the place to discuss the validity of this project or the religious implications of it. If you would like to have a discussion related to those or similiar topics please use the "Backyard (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=121)" section.

That's my thought. You're making a valid point, but I think you're in the wrong forum. This one is for development discussions, not for ideological debates. See you in the Backyard?

/Mimsy

[aysiu]

Thoughts? It's all been said before.

Read all about it in the thread I merged you with.

[quirt3]

What about the pagans? So many more choices in Gods... :-D

I agree! It would be wonderful to see Ubuntu PE.(Pagan Edition)

[Tomosaur]

I would argue that this isn't the place to discuss other distrobutions. Nobody is stopping people from making their own distribution for whatever purpose they want. I am not a practising Christian, but I support the Ubuntu CE because it represents a philosophy which I believe in - choice. I don't think this 'well, there's Ubuntu CE so we should have Ubuntu PE' stuff is very productive. If you WANT Ubuntu PE - then by all means go and create it, but there shouldn't be distributions just for the sake of appeasement. The Ubuntu SE thing is probably the most 'controversial' because it can be seen as a 'reaction' to Ubuntu CE. However, I still think Ubuntu SE should be just as welcome as Ubuntu CE, for the simple fact that it represents a choice. Just because it exists does not mean people will flock to it - but they can if they WANT to. I don't personally take much notice of religious based stuff, I just take it at face value. If Ubuntu CE was suited to what I need/want, then I would install it, but at the moment it just doesn't solve any 'problems' I have with normal Ubuntu. Ubuntu SE on the other hand, has some pretty damn nice art work. The only thing I disagree with is the branding, and the creators have been nice enough to provide a branded version and an unbranded version of their artwork. I also don't think it (currently) warrants it's title. It's not really a new version of Ubuntu, it's just a nice artwork pack - and as such it's no different from any of the other themes available.

I do think that all of the arguments and controversy whenever something like Ubuntu SE appears is just ridiculous. I can accept how Christians may see it as offensive, but it just smacks of hypocrisy to me. The little 'install over CE' sentence is nothing more than a joke, and a fairly obvious one at that, and I propose that the creators of CE are just getting upset for the sake of getting upset. Whatever happened to turning the other cheek?

[themerchant]

There is a version of Linux for muslims too, based on Ubuntu called Arabian Linux. There is some info about it here (http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=arabian). The nature of Linux it is easy to make a custom distro, and it seems like I've seen others with this idea, just can't remember them from the top of my head.
~Jordan Montgomery

Big problem with that, most of the muslim population are not arabs or know the arabic language very well.

[Rashid584]

We're planning on developing a Ubuntu Muslim Edition (well that might not actually be the name :p we're working on a name... :D)

I wanna thank Jereme for inspiring me...its always been an idea of mine ot make a Muslim version of linux, but i never thought i could actually do it. Ubuntu CE has shown that its definitely possible... :D (although itll be very minor changes of course)

BTW thanks for the reconstructor link (whoever posted it...im far too lazy to scroll back up the page :p)

I wonder if a Muslim version of ubuntu would get anywhere near as much, or perhaps more, controversy than the Christian version? lol...im not gonna post it on here (yet) so wont find it :)

BTW, Jereme, have you made any documentation of obstacles you ran into and workarounds and such? I imagine we'd find that kind of thing very useful...we'd appreciate it if you had some stuff?

Hmm...I just noticed Reconstructor is mainly geared towards gnome. We plan to use Kubuntu as a base. Do you reckon it'd work...? I was going to go the command line way anyway but just wondered...reconstructor looks nice

-Rashid

[Faolan84]

Rashid, that sounds awesome and I think you should go for it. I doubt it would get more controversy than my religion... yeah, I can just see the American Religious Right foaming at the mouth when they hear Ubuntu Pagan Edition (Cerunnos wallpapers optional of course).

But in all seriousness, what do all these religious versions provide that Ubuntu and Kubuntu does not. I do know that Ubuntu CE contains a bible on but that is easily fatched from the repos. I could imagine a large part of the distro maintience would have to go around artwork and making it look divine---well as divine as a computer program can look.

Anyways, I do hope that this will lead to (if this is allowed in Islam) an electronic version of the Koran. Maybe some fundie(s) will take the time to read or skim through it one day and realise Pat Robinson and Rush Limbaugh are not credible sources when it comes to its interpretation nor are they an authority on the subject of Islam.

Peace out.

[mhancoc7]

We're planning on developing a Ubuntu Muslim Edition (well that might not actually be the name :p we're working on a name... :D)

I wanna thank Jereme for inspiring me...its always been an idea of mine ot make a Muslim version of linux, but i never thought i could actually do it. Ubuntu CE has shown that its definitely possible... :D (although itll be very minor changes of course)

BTW thanks for the reconstructor link (whoever posted it...im far too lazy to scroll back up the page :p)

I wonder if a Muslim version of ubuntu would get anywhere near as much, or perhaps more, controversy than the Christian version? lol...im not gonna post it on here (yet) so wont find it :)

BTW, Jereme, have you made any documentation of obstacles you ran into and workarounds and such? I imagine we'd find that kind of thing very useful...we'd appreciate it if you had some stuff?

Hmm...I just noticed Reconstructor is mainly geared towards gnome. We plan to use Kubuntu as a base. Do you reckon it'd work...? I was going to go the command line way anyway but just wondered...reconstructor looks nice

-Rashid

I think that it is really a testament to the power of Open Source that anyone or any group can build a custom Ubuntu distro to fit their needs and desires.

I wish you well with your project. Like I have said many times, we may not have the same theology but I support the concept of having the freedom to choose.

I have not put together any documentation of "obstacles". I quite honestly have not had the time. I will always be happy to answer any questions here in the forums. Please do not feel like you can't ask questions about building your distro here. I have tried hard to keep the Ubuntu CE subforum geared more towards the technical aspects as opposed to spreading my beliefs.

You can use UCK (http://uck.sourceforge.net/) to build with Kubuntu. I also think you should be able to get Reconstructor to work with Kubuntu.

Jereme

[rajeev1204]

what does software have to do with religion? HUH?

If not about religion then ,

How about an ubuntu american edition ? ubuntu iraq edition? ubuntu windows edition?


How can people use the name like this?

The name will lose identity in no time.

[mhancoc7]

what does software have to do with religion? HUH?

If not about religion then ,

How about an ubuntu american edition ? ubuntu iraq edition? ubuntu windows edition?


How can people use the name like this?

The name will lose identity in no time.

Well, I would suggest that you search the forum since this has been discussed ad nauseum.

As for "ubuntu american edition"...

If there is a need and enough interest in the project then it will last, if not it will disappear. Simple as that.

As for your comment, " The name will lose identity in no time"...

We contacted Canonical about our project before releasing it and they gave us a few guidlines, which we have followed, and thanked us for introducing Ubuntu to the Christian community. So I guess if they are ok with it then that is all that should matter. Since it is there "name".

Jereme

[aysiu]

You can read 24 pages of controversy about Ubuntu CE here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=233375). Most of the arguments against CE could also apply to the Muslim edition and the Satanic edition... or Xubuntu or Kubuntu or Edubuntu.

Open source is all about forking and tailoring to your own needs. You can't stop the diversification. If you like your OSes boxed into one corner, I would suggest you stick with Windows or Mac OS X. Those won't be forked into hundreds of different versions, since they're closed source.

[rajeev1204]

hi

So that means canonical reserves the right to accept or reject an edition right?

Anyway i dont care about what edition comes out as long as the name is property of canonical, so some control is left with the company.

Also maybe an ubuntu edition for the differently abled would be a good idea .

Also when a lot many people discuss a particular topic,it means it is a significant thing, so aysiu, please dont give me links to read about what others say.I dont find that any fun.This was just a simple question. And please dont always quote the open source thing always . I am not a fan of open source(as of now) , i use ubuntu cos it is free. simple as that . Freedom is different for different people.


And mhanoc, go ahead my friend , i have nothing about anybody ,what u have done is unique , and i respect that.Good luck with the project.

HAPPY NEW YEAR


regards

rajeev

[aysiu]

If all you care about is Ubuntu being cost-free, what does it matter to you how many different versions there are?

[rajeev1204]

it doesnt matter.

I just gave my opinion .

Anyway thanks for ur guide on psychocats .Helped a lot

[rajeev1204]

oops

I did not know that the christian edition is unofficial .

hmm yes i agree with this stand . So that means this OS can be customised endlessly.

Sorry guys , i thought like cannonical was endorsing or promoting a religion or something like that.

But i still feel the creator is using the ubuntu name for something i just dont understand .The objections is only cos we love ubuntu so much.And the reasons given on the website are maybe a little vague for users to understand. No offence , but this project seems like a wierd idea. Like aysiu said, he doesnt understand the edu... and xu... forks either. Me neither.

Software with a religious bent ? hmm still dont get it.


I apologise for any offence. Not intended at all.


ok happy new year once again



regards

rajeev

[Rashid584]

Rashid, that sounds awesome and I think you should go for it. I doubt it would get more controversy than my religion... yeah, I can just see the American Religious Right foaming at the mouth when they hear Ubuntu Pagan Edition (Cerunnos wallpapers optional of course).

Hehe...i guess we'll find out eh? :p

But in all seriousness, what do all these religious versions provide that Ubuntu and Kubuntu does not. I do know that Ubuntu CE contains a bible on but that is easily fatched from the repos. I could imagine a large part of the distro maintience would have to go around artwork and making it look divine---well as divine as a computer program can look.

Anyways, I do hope that this will lead to (if this is allowed in Islam) an electronic version of the Koran. Maybe some fundie(s) will take the time to read or skim through it one day and realise Pat Robinson and Rush Limbaugh are not credible sources when it comes to its interpretation nor are they an authority on the subject of Islam.

Well, for me at least, making a tailored edition isn't about the OS suddenly becoming purely for use for reliigious purposes or anything like that. The idea is, to fix bug #1 on malone: Micro$oft has a majority market share. At the moment, the majority of Christian, Muslim, Jewish, whatever, windows users see little reason to switch from Windows to open source software. By showing them that free software offers them things which proprietary software does not, it gives them a, hopefully very good, reason to switch or at the very least consider switching.

Yes, there is Christian and Islamic software for windows, but there isn't a whole integrated "OS" as it were...it just demonstrates the power of open source software as Jereme put it.

Also, because Islam stresses the importance of all forms of knowledge, and its availability to everyone. Islam inherently advocates "open source"-ness, and it annoys me slightly that Muslims have only very limitedly jumped on the open source bandwagon. I hope to try to fix that a little :)

Oh, and yes you can have an electronic Quran. In fact, there is already a number of GNU Quran software, although unfortunately not of the quality of something like Gnome-sword (yet :P)

Peace out.

Peace :)

I think that it is really a testament to the power of Open Source that anyone or any group can build a custom Ubuntu distro to fit their needs and desires.

I wish you well with your project. Like I have said many times, we may not have the same theology but I support the concept of having the freedom to choose.

Peace :) Thanks for your support (all of you) and we hope you well with your project too. Though you obviously don't need it, UCE is doing well :D

I have not put together any documentation of "obstacles". I quite honestly have not had the time. I will always be happy to answer any questions here in the forums. Please do not feel like you can't ask questions about building your distro here. I have tried hard to keep the Ubuntu CE subforum geared more towards the technical aspects as opposed to spreading my beliefs.

You can use UCK (http://uck.sourceforge.net/) to build with Kubuntu. I also think you should be able to get Reconstructor to work with Kubuntu.

Jereme

Thank you, appreciate it :)

Will be sure to ask you, insha'Allah (God willing)

-Rashid

[amunimanghi]

Interesting. I will be waiting for this. :D
I don't see why people can't customize a linux distro to fit their flavor. Infact, I would encourage it. Long live opensource.

[aberry5555]

This is a bit manic isn't it? Since when did christians decide to segregate things and offer only to their community. Also, apart from the fact that you have built a few programs in that, otherwise, people could have downloaded for themselves, it is no different. The only real difference is you manage to make people believe you're doing something for the sake of sticking a cross on it. In the same vein someone with a crucifix hood ornament on his car would be considered a fool.

[doobit]

This is a bit manic isn't it? Since when did christians decide to segregate things and offer only to their community. Also, apart from the fact that you have built a few programs in that, otherwise, people could have downloaded for themselves, it is no different. The only real difference is you manage to make people believe you're doing something for the sake of sticking a cross on it. In the same vein someone with a crucifix hood ornament on his car would be considered a fool.

You sound a bit intolerant.

[Lord Illidan]

This is a bit manic isn't it? Since when did christians decide to segregate things and offer only to their community. Also, apart from the fact that you have built a few programs in that, otherwise, people could have downloaded for themselves, it is no different. The only real difference is you manage to make people believe you're doing something for the sake of sticking a cross on it. In the same vein someone with a crucifix hood ornament on his car would be considered a fool.

Simple. It makes it easier to put in a cd and boot from it, especially for people who have no prior experience of Linux.

I think your issue is with the word christians. If it was some other word, you'd probably don't care, right? I am a christian myself. I don't use Ubuntu CE, because I don't need the programs it includes, but I recognise the need it fulfills. If there was an Ubuntu Pagan Edition, and it catered well for pagans, and encouraged more people to switch to Linux, why not? Same thing for any Muslim or Jewish edition for Ubuntu.

Same goes for Edubuntu. It is better for schools. Sure, I can just get Ubuntu and download the programs from the repos. But then it won't be as convenient, nor will there be a live cd which I can just slip into my pc. Xubuntu and Flubuntu and Kubuntu are for people who like alternative wms.

Regarding Ubuntu Satan Edition, the idea was a joke, and let's face it, when I compare http://www.ubuntu.com/htdocs/uweb/menu/ubuntu-def.png that motto to this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaVeyan_Satanism

I don't think they are compatible.

But let's not turn this into a religious issue. There are multiple versions of Ubuntu out there. So why are you bothered by them?

[aberry5555]

Meh, it really isnt to do with christianity, i have nothing against religion, in fact I applaud alot of christians for doing the positive work they do in their communities, regardless of who they're helping, but I don't see the point in this particular product, it's like saying you have to be christian to use it, you shouldn't be, ubuntu was designed to unite the people, not divide them. Honestly my comment wasn't meant to be offencive to christians, and sorry that it came across that way, I just don't really understand why this distro was brought about.

[mhancoc7]

Meh, it really isnt to do with christianity, i have nothing against religion, in fact I applaud alot of christians for doing the positive work they do in their communities, regardless of who they're helping, but I don't see the point in this particular product, it's like saying you have to be christian to use it, you shouldn't be, ubuntu was designed to unite the people, not divide them. Honestly my comment wasn't meant to be offencive to christians, and sorry that it came across that way, I just don't really understand why this distro was brought about.

Have you checked out the Ubuntu CE project site (http://www.christianubuntu.com)? Have you taken any time to look into it or did you just see the name and make up your mind?

Ubuntu CE FAQ (http://www.whatwouldjesusdownload.com/christianubuntu/2006/07/faq.html)

Jereme

[aberry5555]

I have, the description and the FAQ both say that it is simply ubuntu with a hood ornament and some pre-installed software. Fair enough they may be trying to do a good thing but you're making it in to something that it isn't. All this distro has extra is pre-installed software and, so, the fact that it's branded christian is a bit of a mis-nomer, as only 1-2% of it was designed by someone specifically for christians. It would have been better, I would have thought, to make something a little more universal, add in tools for all families and such, and also incorporate some of the tools you want without having to brand it as implicitily christian. This way your distribution could be more wide-spread and the work it does would be a positive influence on both believers and non-believers, as is the christian way.

[HareBall]

I have, the description and the FAQ both say that it is simply ubuntu with a hood ornament and some pre-installed software. Fair enough they may be trying to do a good thing but you're making it in to something that it isn't. All this distro has extra is pre-installed software and, so, the fact that it's branded christian is a bit of a mis-nomer, as only 1-2% of it was designed by someone specifically for christians. It would have been better, I would have thought, to make something a little more universal, add in tools for all families and such, and also incorporate some of the tools you want without having to brand it as implicitily christian. This way your distribution could be more wide-spread and the work it does would be a positive influence on both believers and non-believers, as is the christian way.
So, basically you want it watered down to appeal to more people? It isn't hurting you, so why are you worried about it. The reason for a Christian version is for it to appeal to Christians who might not otherwise consider Linux.

[aberry5555]

It just seems a little too OTT religious, alonside christian bumper-stickers and t-shirts and things. It isn't hurting anyone but the only people it's doing favours for are christians. I don't know, each to their own I suppose.

[Rashid584]

ubuntu is already very very universal. if youre bothered about it...dont be. use ubuntu

ubuntu ce isnt exclusively for christians anyway...theres nothing stopping a non-christian from downloading and installing it. thered just be little point (apart from dansguardin which from the sounds of it is very good)

the only thing i remotely agree with you on is the need for dansguardian to be used on normal ubuntu. parental control is important for home users and ubuntu should definitely have the built in ability to enforce some sort of parental control (should be off by default, easily turned on and managed)

-Rashid

[aberry5555]

Saying it isn't exclusively for christians is incorrect. It is, in the same way that the bible is. People are very welcome to go and buy themselves a copy of the bible or even to go down to their local church and borrow one, but if you aren't a christian you aren't going to want to. Besides I'm not opposing the work these people do just the way they've presented it. IMHO labelling someone else's work your own is wrong in the first place, unless some considerable effort on your part has been put in to justify it. An example of a good way to promote christianity and ubuntu would be doing something like this guy did:
http://apatch.org/ He's designed a piece of software to customise how msn messenger works. Admittedly this is not a particularly useful piece of software to your average family but, at the end of the installation, he invites you to take a look at his writings on the muslim faith. Not in your face, not rebranding someone elses coding skills for his own end, simply asking if you could spare a minute to do so. I'm not religious but I did feel compelled to go and take a look. He managed to provide a tool that a large audience would want, and also managed to present his religion well at the same time. My feeling is the CE version of Ubuntu is sort of the polar opposite. I think it would have been better served as a software package bundle, rather than a whole OS.

[Rashid584]

trust me, the point of view your expressing has been expressed enough times already in the cafe/ubuntu ce section/wherever

you have the right to express your opinion of course :) (but if your looking for an answer check the answers other people got in those threads)

-Rashid

[aberry5555]

Fair enough, as I said earlier no offence meant to any christians or to the authors of this distro, it's just an opinion.

[jblebrun]

Have any of you tried Ubuntu Atheist Edition? After installing it I couldn't configure anything. Everything I tried to run something as root, I got:

"Account 'root' does not exist."

[doobit]

Have any of you tried Ubuntu Atheist Edition? After installing it I couldn't configure anything. Everything I tried to run something as root, I got:

"Account 'root' does not exist."


:-k :rolleyes: :-D

[FeraTech]

Well from what I gathered and the idea behind Ubuntu CE is that this version is simply distributed as a marketing tool. Unlike Windows Ubuntu needs to tailor itself to the consumer.

It would essentially be easier to offer Ubuntu as a base and have themes for user to select from. However, because Ubuntu is not main stream it needs to offer as many possible variations to custom tailor itself to each particular user. This is what I believe Ubuntu CE tries to do.

I had no idea this thread would get so much attention. I just wanted to get some questions answered about this particular distribution.

Mainly because as I stated earlier I feel in a perfect world Ubuntu itself would simply be a more ideal OS if the basic version was the only one offered and all it's other distributions would be packages/themes the user pick from to suit their needs.

However, practically speaking this is impossible and limits Ubuntu's marketability.

IE,
You are a Christian who feels like windows does not do enough off the shelf to help protect your children from inappropriate material on the Internet. Ubuntu CE out of the box without having to install additional software or go through a complicated set of installation options offers more of the things you ideally would like to see in a computer.

Thus spreading the Ubuntu seed.

[FeraTech]

jblebrun, you sir are hilarious, so much so that I got yelled at for being too loud in the library...

[vvlist]

what does software have to do with religion? HUH?

If not about religion then ,

How about an ubuntu american edition ? ubuntu iraq edition? ubuntu windows edition?


How can people use the name like this?

The name will lose identity in no time.

I agree with you, Ubuntu will lose it's focus as well when there is 50 different versions. Plus I believe that one version can ruin another's reputation.

[Lord Illidan]

I agree with you, Ubuntu will lose it's focus as well when there is 50 different versions. Plus I believe that one version can ruin another's reputation.

I doubt that. Canonical officially maintains Ubuntu. The rest have their own focus.

Can you say that Debian has lost its focus because of the large number of forks?

[aysiu]

I agree with you, Ubuntu will lose it's focus as well when there is 50 different versions. Plus I believe that one version can ruin another's reputation.
The are only four official Ubuntu versions: Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, and Edubuntu.

Ubuntu Satanic Edition and Ubuntu Christian Edition are not official Ubuntu versions. They're private projects developed by individuals who have a focused interest and who are taking advantage of one of the greatest things about open source--the ability to fork.

The ability to fork allows Ubuntu to be Ubuntu and not Debian. It allows Linux Mint to be Linux Mint and not Debian. It allows PCLinuxOS to not be Mandriva and for Mandriva not to be Red Hat.

Anyone who uses Ubuntu benefits from Ubuntu because of the open source philosophy. So don't complain if people use that open source philosophy to tailor Ubuntu to their own needs. If Ubuntu had to be built from the ground up, you might be using it maybe ten years from now... instead of now.

[dakotadare2b]

The are only four official Ubuntu versions: Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, and Edubuntu.

Ubuntu Satanic Edition and Ubuntu Christian Edition are not official Ubuntu versions. They're private projects developed by individuals who have a focused interest and who are taking advantage of one of the greatest things about open source--the ability to fork.

The ability to fork allows Ubuntu to be Ubuntu and not Debian. It allows Linux Mint to be Linux Mint and not Debian. It allows PCLinuxOS to not be Mandriva and for Mandriva not to be Red Hat.

Anyone who uses Ubuntu benefits from Ubuntu because of the open source philosophy. So don't complain if people use that open source philosophy to tailor Ubuntu to their own needs. If Ubuntu had to be built from the ground up, you might be using it maybe ten years from now... instead of now.

I would think that would about wrap it up?!?;)

[jamespi]

yes but all those forks have different names, which eliminates the possibility they will impact the reputation of their parent distro.

ubuntu christian edition, and ubuntu satanic edition sound like official versions even if they arent. this isnt about forking, it's about brand identity. If ubuntu satanic edition was called Satanux or something then your argument would be true.

If Ubuntu CE or Ubuntu SE do something to **** off a lot of people, that ill will is going to be attached to the Ubuntu brand. If Ubuntu did something terrible (like have a broken upgrade system when upgrading from dapper to edgy) that isnt going to reflect badly on Debian, because Ubuntu isn't called Debian Ubuntu Edition.

If it's not an official version, it shouldn't carry the name. All that does is mislead people, and open Ubuntu up to needless risk.

[aysiu]

I happen to agree with you, jamespi.

Unfortunately, Jereme wanted to name Ubuntu CE with the Ubuntu name and Ubuntu has already offered it's blessing on that despite CE's unofficial status. I'm not sure if Satanic Edition has the same blessing or not.

[Darrious]

So because the Satanic Edition doesn't have Ubuntu's approval does that mean that Ubuntu has the right to make them change the name.

[aysiu]

So because the Satanic Edition doesn't have Ubuntu's approval does that mean that Ubuntu has the right to make them change the name.
Well, first of all, I don't know that Satanic Edition doesn't have Ubuntu's approval. Jereme--facing a lot of opposition to CE--made it very clear, however, that he asked for Ubuntu's approval and they gave it.

I don't know if SE asked and received it but didn't publicize it, asked and didn't receive it, or just didn't bother to ask in the first place. I would suspect that latter.

[Darrious]

And if the SE distro did not ask permission can Ubuntu do something about that, or can Ubuntu not.

[aysiu]

And if the SE distro did not ask permission can Ubuntu do something about that, or can Ubuntu not.
If SE didn't ask for permission and Ubuntu really cared, they could take legal action against SE.

As far as I can tell, SE is just a joke in reaction to CE, and if I were Ubuntu, I wouldn't take it too seriously. Legal action would just draw undue attention to SE.

[FeraTech]

I'm not liking where this is going.

So what if SE does exist?

There are absolutely no benefits to taking legal action or banning it's production. I like the fact that Ubuntu is open with what people can tailor the product to.

[hardyn]

i would speculate (i can ask my layer friend) in copright law, the use of Ubuntu would have to be endorsed by cannonical. CE seems to have an agreement with cannonical, for SE would have to seek a similar agreement to use the Ubuntu badge. If cannonical chooses to not chase these spin off versions they would be passively endorsing its use.

*opinion warning* however with cannonical making concessions for CE, they will have to come to a quick decision about the current naming conventions, if they endorse CE but not SE, or DE or PQZ they have created a company position on the philsophical centering of ubuntu, something i don't think that anybody wants.

it there a forum to ask such a question to somebody at cannonical? get an idea of what cannonical thinks they may do? I think that most people agree that the over use of the ubuntu badge will water down the ubuntu name, as it will really cause more confusion that anything for linux noobs. if you have 4 offical flavors and 54 spin-offs; this forum will have to get a little bigger.

[aysiu]

To add to the confusion a bit more, Ubuntu Satanic Edition's banner reads Ubuntu Satanic Edition: The Distro of the Beast indicating SE is a distro, but in the About page (http://parker1.co.uk/satanic/about/), it says What is Ubuntu Satanic Edition?
Ubuntu SE is not currently a distro, it’s more a series of themes to transform the look of Ubuntu. You must first download and install one of the standard Ubuntu variants and then upgrade to Ubuntu SE. Don’t worry; you can easily change your system back if you intend to recant.

[Rashid584]

As far as I know, all the spinoffs thus far (ubuntu CE, ubuntu SE) have only made relatively minor changes such as custom artwork and some extra packages pre-installed by default.

Changes like that couldn't make any massive problems such as a very bad upgrade system or anything...I really can't see even the simplest of Windows users thinking "Wow, Ubuntu Christian Editions wallpaper sucks, therefore, Ubuntu sucks :|"

Same applies for Ubuntu SE

-Rashid

[hardyn]

Rashid, i think we agree on most views, and Aysiu, i know we have beat this one to death, ill keep it brief.

i agree that the ubuntu name risks being dammaged by the violation of a registered trade mark; and yes, CE did it right, they asked permission. I would imagine that cannonical is going have to put a foot down at some point and make an offical statement and remind thouse about copyright law. they do own the company name, the company name, Ubuntu (R), is not open source as with the logo; and i would image resonable variations of the logo as well (eg. devil horns).

as i see it cannonical has three choices: give the use of the ubuntu name up to public domain, un-restriced use. restrict useage of the ubuntu name to "approved" repackagers; which would create a pseudo offical releases. deny all use of the ubuntu name by external sources.

[happy-and-lost]

As a nihilist, I fail to see the merits religiously branded anything, other than to annoy non-believers... but in Ubutnu CE's defence, its heart is in the right place. If I were setting up a Ubuntu PC for use by "impressionable children", I'd use a UbuntuCE CD, because it comes with a preconfigured Dansguardian (thus saving me the effort).

On another note, good luck with the Muslim Edition, just don't name it Ubuntu ME :)

[parker13]

Just to clarify, Ubuntu Satanic Edition have not asked permission from Canonical regarding the use of the Ubuntu name and logo. I guess we just assumed that its use was OK, as there are numerous distros and projects out there which have changed the "circle of friends" logo in a variety of ways.

If they were upset by our use of it, then they would not have to take legal action. The last thing I would want to do would be to damage Ubuntu or Canonical in any way.

[rajeev1204]

End Of Thread

[golem3]

I'm just thinking, out of sheer fairness, shouldn't we have a forum for the Ubuntu Satanic Edition (http://parker1.co.uk/satanic/) since we have one for the Christian Edition?

[maniacmusician]

Ubuntu CE was given a forum because it asked for one

[ffi]

Christian, satanic....blegh two sides of the same stupid superstitious coin ](*,)

Why can´t we have an atheist edition with the inclusion of lotś of scientific tools and databases like pubmed etc?

[golem3]

SO anyone can get a forum if they want? If I did a few tweaks to a distro and released it, would I get a forum?? Hmm..doubt it.

[maniacmusician]

I think the whole religious thing is a load, but the best thing to do is just ignore it and be tolerant. Satanic Edition was at least a joke and in good humor.

Anyways, people have the freedom to do whatever they want; yes, even use Linux and religion together. As Ubuntu users, the best thing we can do is be tolerant. That really reflects our philosophy as a whole. And no one's forcing anyone else to use anything :)

[maniacmusician]

SO anyone can get a forum if they want? If I did a few tweaks to a distro and released it, would I get a forum?? Hmm..doubt it.
you would have to make a dedicated effort at it and it would have to be a valid project.

Whether I agree with his ideas, philosophies, or even thoughts (and I don't), Jereme (mhancoc7) did put a lot of work into Ubuntu CE. He's even built his own little niche around it.

Basically, don't make this whole religion thing into a big feud.

Tolerance is the word of the century, my dears.

[ffi]

That really reflects our philosophy as a whole. And no one's forcing anyone else to use anything :)


If that was were religionists stop I would be okay with them unfortunately religionists have a stron tendency to unite and force their stupid superstitions and barbarities onto others....

[golem3]

I think the whole religious thing is a load, but the best thing to do is just ignore it and be tolerant. Satanic Edition was at least a joke and in good humor.

Anyways, people have the freedom to do whatever they want; yes, even use Linux and religion together. As Ubuntu users, the best thing we can do is be tolerant. That really reflects our philosophy as a whole. And no one's forcing anyone else to use anything :)

I totally agree with you. The whole religion thing is a bunch of ____ .

BUT the forums support it by creating an entire subforum for it. I am unsure why that is. IMHO, tolerance (like you said) is good, but I can't help but wonder why we give it that high level of support...I mean, any technical problem should be solvable by normal Edgy/Dapper users out there. It's not like suddenly the command line is different, right?

[steven8]

It's not like suddenly the command line is different, right?

Well sure. It's the 10 commands line. Why do so many people zero in on the Christian Edition. More people are hung up on it than it is hung up on them.

Let it go.

[maniacmusician]

If that was were religionists stop I would be okay with them unfortunately religionists have a stron tendency to unite and force their stupid superstitions and barbarities onto others....
actually, re-read your post. you sound the bigot here and not them. I don't agree with religion either, but mouthing off like you is only going to create arguments. Why don't people understand the dynamics of peaceful talking?

I totally agree with you. The whole religion thing is a bunch of ____ .

BUT the forums support it by creating an entire subforum for it. I am unsure why that is. IMHO, tolerance (like you said) is good, but I can't help but wonder why we give it that high level of support...I mean, any technical problem should be solvable by normal Edgy/Dapper users out there. It's not like suddenly the command line is different, right?
The forums are not supporting Ubuntu CE. They're simply providing mhancoc7 a place where he can provice support for Ubuntu CE users. It's much different. Also, there are issues specific to Ubuntu CE because some of the software he runs on it isn't on a stock Ubuntu install. Anyways its not a big deal; Like I said, the forums aren't endorsing Ubuntu CE.

Well sure. It's the 10 commands line. Why do so many people zero in on the Christian Edition. More people are hung up on it than it is hung up on them.

Let it go.

Ditto.

[ffi]

actually, re-read your post. you sound the bigot here and not them. I don't agree with religion either, but mouthing off like you is only going to create arguments. Why don't people understand the dynamics of peaceful talking?

I am not a bigot, but I am confronted with a reality were religionists force their worldview upon me, things which should have come down to individual choice have become laws favouring certain religionists? Eg, why do I have to pay for religious education, so they can brainwash their children with this crap, why are shops not allowed to open, even if the owner wants to open and run it himself? Why do I get woke up every sunday at 9:15, when I really just want to sleep late? Why are religionists allowed to brutally torture animals?

Just a few small examples of religionists not leaving me alone in my daily life. I don't stick my nose in their life, so why do they stick theirs in mine?

[matthew]

1. The UbuntuCE issue of them having a subforum has been discussed ad nauseum. It's a non issue as it's already been decided.

2. Feel free to discuss the other stuff in this thread, but I'm moving the thread to the Backyard. Keep it friendly, please.

[Burgresso]

Well for one, I hope the developeres of Ubuntu SE ask for a forum....(hint hint) :twisted:

[migla]

CE can probably lure a lot of users to the FLOSS side, which would make it a good thing from a pragmatic point of view, although I basically don't think people benefit from being superstitious.

Just having a subforum doesn't exactly constitute forcing stuff down our throats, does it?

Since there is the CE, I'd like to see an Islamic Edition and others as well. (But I'm not going to put any together myself, though).

As for the Satanic Edition... They're not really satanists are they? It's probably a joke and commentary and perhaps also stems from a desire for cool fiery logos and background images...

[spockrock]

Well for one, I hope the developeres of Ubuntu SE ask for a forum....(hint hint) :twisted:

hahahhaha, I don't think we are going to, but then again thats parker13's decision, but he has not expressed to me that we want/need a subforum.

I am however working on a live disc....;)


As for the Satanic Edition... They're not really satanists are they? It's probably a joke and commentary and perhaps also stems from a desire for cool fiery logos and background images...

Umm no I am not a satanist, I don't believe in god nor in Satan, but being a metal head I love the idea.....

[aysiu]

Since there is the CE, I'd like to see an Islamic Edition and others as well. (But I'm not going to put any together myself, though). I, too, would love to see an Islamic Edition. You're getting at the key point, though--Ubuntu Christian Edition doesn't exist because people thought it was a good idea. It exists because someone created it. The subforum exists because the creator asked nicely for it. Jereme put a lot of hard work into creating and maintaining Ubuntu CE and went through all the proper channels. I don't agree with Ubuntu's decision to allow Jereme to use the Ubuntu name, but he did ask them politely for the right to use it, and Ubuntu agreed, so what's done is done.

Anyone who is serious about making a fork can do it and get the same kind of support as Ubuntu CE got. Two prerequisites: #1 you have to be serious and #2 you have to make the fork yourself, not just think it's a good idea or demand someone else make it for you.

A lot of people like to say Christians or religious folk have shoved religion down other people's throats, and this may have been historically true (some right-wing American politicians, the crusades, the inquisition, etc.), but mhancoc7 has never done so on these forums, and if he were to, he'd be warned and banned right away.

Jereme (mhancoc7) has put most of his energy into making and maintaining Ubuntu CE and some of his energy defending its existence, but none of it proselytizing other users.

I would suggest to the naysayers that they use their energy for something productive--helping new users, creating their own forks, etc. Not bashing other projects.

[matthew]

@aysiu: well said!!

[PatrickMay16]

Christian, satanic....blegh two sides of the same stupid superstitious coin ](*,)

Why can´t we have an atheist edition with the inclusion of lotś of scientific tools and databases like pubmed etc?

Science doesn't equal atheism.

[mips]

I agree with aysiu here. I'm also against UbuntuCE using the Ubuntu name but I do not own the name and the owners are fine with it.

Jereme has never shoved Christianity down anyones throats. He seems like an honest, kind & compassionate kinda guy which I respect him for.

Just for the record, I'm anti-religion in case any of you get any ideas.

Edit: I just had an idea. Can Canonical truly own the word/brand Ubuntu seeing it is common word in language. Like me trying to use the word Humanity for my company, copyrighting it. Seems wrong, does it not ?

[gusjones]

I am a Christian :cool: but the last thing I want to do is ram what I think down anyone's throats; not all of us are stuck in the colonial past.

Some of us called Christians respect other's views whilst when it is asked for will happily give an opinion of what we are all about. I'm also happy to listen to other views when they are not rammed down my throat.

Ubuntu CE I feel is a gr8 idea (geting the superb Ubuntu name being a bit of a coo), although for me as I'm so deeply into Ubuntu I go for the core install and add the stuff I need l8r.

For the less techie minded CE provides what they want with minimal hassle.

:)

[lotusleaf]

Meanwhile, I've been working on:

Goetiabuntu "Linux for demons!"

* Pre-loaded on a red, two-horned, fork-tailed USB thumb drive.

* Spews various scents at random at boot, according to scents associated with different demons and their related planet

* Features a button on the side of the USB thumb drive which projects a laser triangle onto any surface for quick and easy demon evocation

* Supports many languages including Coptic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coptic_language).

* Includes several public domain texts and sound files to ease one into evocation or invocation

* Animated screensavers including original burning candle, demons of the Goetia, sigils of the demons, etc.

* And more

Because I know people will ask, "what is the Goetia?" See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goetia

[aysiu]

Edit: I just had an idea. Can Canonical truly own the word/brand Ubuntu seeing it is common word in language. Like me trying to use the word Humanity for my company, copyrighting it. Seems wrong, does it not ? Well, an apple is a fruit, isn't it? But you can't just start up your own computer company and call it Apple, Inc. or start up your own music studio and call it Apple Records.

People are allowed to trademark names in association with certain product types or images/logos.

The word itself--Ubuntu--is just a word, but in association with an operating system, it's Canonical's.

[JLB]

Just having a subforum doesn't exactly constitute forcing stuff down our throats, does it?
No it doesn't. The folks that cry about it are more hung up on the word "Christian" than they are Ubuntu CE imo.


Since there is the CE, I'd like to see an Islamic Edition and others as well. (But I'm not going to put any together myself, though).
Why do you want to see an islamic edition? I don't. at least not from an equal opportunity standpoint for that is rubbish in itself. Unless *YOU* ( or someone) make an Ubuntu Islamic Edition and do like the maintainer of Ubuntu CE did. Jump through the hoops and ask the right people.


As for the Satanic Edition... They're not really satanists are they? It's probably a joke and commentary and perhaps also stems from a desire for cool fiery logos and background images... Ya think? :D

[jr.gotti]

Please! For the love of God (Pardon the Pun) let this die! Is anyone forcing you to install UbuntuCE? Is anyone ever RECOMMENDING you install it?! No. It's not bothering you by being there. Live and let live. Please.

You have no idea how annoying these threads get.

The "Ubuntu Satan Edition" wasn't funny the first time someone posted it eons ago. And you're not having any better luck here. Move along.

[julian67]

How about a Roman Forum....complete with lions?

[spockrock]

we should have a section called the amazing space lego pyramid, thats just nothing but unadulterated anything goes sadistic posting ..........

[doobit]

we should have a section called the amazing space lego pyramid, thats just nothing but unadulterated anything goes sadistic posting ..........

Yes, that would be pleasing and heartwarming.

[jr.gotti]

How about a Roman Forum....complete with lions?

I find that completely uncalled for.

[matthew]

I think this thread has outlived its usefulness. I'm closing it.

[bruenig]

Just a tip. There is a really cool theme pack you might like that is really easy to install. The website says they "suggest Ubuntu Christian Edition, but that the standard Ubuntu will do just fine."

Here is a link (http://parker1.co.uk/satanic/)

[floke]

You do know there is no god, right?

[mhancoc7]

You do know there is no god, right?

Please take your flame bait somewhere else.

Jereme

[HareBall]

You do know there is no god, right?
Just read my signature.

[floke]

Who said I was angry? :)

[mysticrider92]

You do know there is no god, right?

We have been through all of this before. I know you are entitled to your opinion, but that is not what the discussion is about, so there is no reason to say it. And I do know that there is a god.

[bruenig]

To the person with the angry quote, it is not god who the atheists are angry at, it is you. It is the religious and their disuniting and oppressive ways. Nobody is angry at a nonexistent thing, they are angry at those who press that nonexistent thing into areas where it isn't called for.

See Ubuntu CE for such an example.

[mhancoc7]

To the person with the angry quote, it is not god who the atheists are angry at, it is you. It is the religious and their disuniting and oppressive ways. Nobody is angry at a nonexistent thing, they are angry at those who press that nonexistent thing into areas where it isn't called for.

See Ubuntu CE for such an example.

I understand that there are many Christians who push their beliefs onto others. However, it is unfair to say that about Ubuntu CE. If you have taken any time to look into the project you would see that it is not about spreading Christianity. It is about spreading Ubuntu.

Jereme

[montgoej]

I understand that there are many Christians who push their beliefs onto others. However, it is unfair to say that about Ubuntu CE. If you have taken any time to look into the project you would see that it is not about spreading Christianity. It is about spreading Ubuntu.

Jereme

Truthfully spoken. How many times has the line about spreading Ubuntu with CE been said...50 probably. Noone is pushing their beliefs with CE, the CE forum is sub-forum which those who read it choose to read it....just my $.02
~Jordan Montgomery

[bruenig]

But it creates unnecessary division. Chrisitans seem to create a christian everything. All it does is segment society. I mean christian churches, ok that makes sense because you got to worship your god and whatnot in your way. But christian bookstores, christian universities, christian schools in general, christian everything. There is no logical reason that an Operating System should be christian. That is the only issue. I mean certainly there is opposition for other reasons that are christian related and how it may not be fun being grouped in with them as part of the community, but it is the unnecessary divisions that are upsetting.

[HareBall]

To the person with the angry quote, it is not god who the atheists are angry at, it is you. It is the religious and their disuniting and oppressive ways. Nobody is angry at a nonexistent thing, they are angry at those who press that nonexistent thing into areas where it isn't called for.

See Ubuntu CE for such an example.
No it is GOD who you are angry at. It is the Christians you point it at. Why do you care what I believe? I'm not hurting you by worshiping my GOD.
I could go on about this, but this really isn't the place for it.
Besides, you came here. I didn't come looking for you.

[IYY]

To the person with the angry quote, it is not god who the atheists are angry at, it is you. It is the religious and their disuniting and oppressive ways.

Right... Show me an example of oppressive Christian posts on this forum. Can't find any? I can easily find an oppressive atheist post, just a page back:

You do know there is no god, right?

PS: I am not a Christian, nor am I an atheist. I just comment about what I see on these forums, on the Internet and in real life. I understand that in the southern US things could be different, but from what I see, it's the atheists who do most of the oppressing.

[chadders]

I'm Agnostic, so I am neither for Christianity nor Atheism I'll state this first.

What is the point of a Christian OS? Linux is so customisable that you can make an Anything OS with Linux. So why Ubuntu CE when you can just customise Ubuntu (whatever edition) and have perhaps the most up to date Ubuntu CE?

[mhancoc7]

This subject has already been discussed adnauseum. I do not appreciate the hijacking of this thread by those who have not taken the time to research Ubuntu CE. I apologize to the OP for this as well.

So far all of the questions that have been asked have already been answered in the forums. I would suggest that the forums Search Function (http://ubuntuforums.org/search.php)should be utilized before posting.

I am sorry if I seem a bit rude, but it is very frustrating when those who claim that Christians are closed-minded to judge my project based on their pre-conceived notions and then claim Christians are the ones being oppressive. It is just blows my mind.

Jereme

[bruenig]

Right... Show me an example of oppressive Christian posts on this forum. Can't find any? I can easily find an oppressive atheist post, just a page back:

Posts can't be oppressive. "Oppression is the negative outcome experienced by people targeted by the cruel exercise of power in a society or social group." That particular post was in response to the "angry at god" strawman guy and was about his claim not about Ubuntu CE. Living in America, I can speak to the oppression of Christians. Here is a nice study to that effect. (http://www.ur.umn.edu/FMPro?-db=releases&-lay=web&-format=umnnewsreleases/releasesdetail.html&ID=2816&-Find)

And to that guy, you are really funny. It is sad when you have to assign atheists a position and then when they say that don't uphold that position argue that they do. You intentionally assign them a nonsensical position (angry at god) and then try to prop that up even when nobody has claimed that. The opposition cannot possibly be to a nonexistent god in the same way that I cannot be angry at invisible unicorns. The guy you were responding to for instance simply said "you know there is no god." Not only is that not him being angry at god, he doesn't appear to be angry at all. Your only hope is to hang on to your strawmen though, so I guess I don't blame you. When you are fighting a losing battle, what else can you do but cling on to nonsense.

See the awesome "my grandfather ain't no ape" argument.

[floke]

Easy there tigers!

It's me, the not-really angry guy :)

The 'no god' line was really meant in a light-hearted way, as in the way you would comment to a friend you'd just had a bet with that 'you know I'm gonna win right?'.

I'm not angry with anyone, least of all with the Big G in the sky (since s/he's not really there anyway). In fact, its all rather amusing how people can get all bent out of shape about being 'oppressed' by someone posting a jesty one-liner in a thread. But then, this is a microcosm of how social divisions and ultimately wars start ain't it? What would Jesus do if he read the post? He certainly wouldn't have complained about being oppressed (too busy off dealing with real oppression I expect).

Get a sense of humour dude.

Still, while we're on it; since the CE is now the semi-official christian edition, by default the normal ubuntu version must be the non-christian version, and, since there are no other relgion-tagged ubuntus around, must therefore be the non-religious, agnostic or athiest edition.

So, one more reason to be happy.

[HareBall]

Posts can't be oppressive. "Oppression is the negative outcome experienced by people targeted by the cruel exercise of power in a society or social group." That particular post was in response to the "angry at god" strawman guy and was about his claim not about Ubuntu CE. Living in America, I can speak to the oppression of Christians. Here is a nice study to that effect. (http://www.ur.umn.edu/FMPro?-db=releases&-lay=web&-format=umnnewsreleases/releasesdetail.html&ID=2816&-Find)

And to that guy, you are really funny. It is sad when you have to assign atheists a position and then when they say that don't uphold that position argue that they do. You intentionally assign them a nonsensical position (angry at god) and then try to prop that up even when nobody has claimed that. The opposition cannot possibly be to a nonexistent god in the same way that I cannot be angry at invisible unicorns. The guy you were responding to for instance simply said "you know there is no god." Not only is that not him being angry at god, he doesn't appear to be angry at all. Your only hope is to hang on to your strawmen though, so I guess I don't blame you. When you are fighting a losing battle, what else can you do but cling on to nonsense.

See the awesome "my grandfather ain't no ape" argument.
Your right, I should not have said you(they) are angry at GOD. I should have said they are angry about GOD. Just like the sig says. If it wasn't true you would not have posted about it. You would have just blown it off.

[mhancoc7]

Let's all please let the OP have their thread back. If we want to discuss the existence of God then someone should start a thread in the Backyard.

If we can't agree to do that then will a moderator please just close this thread.

Thanks, Jereme

[bruenig]

Your right, I should not have said you(they) are angry at GOD. I should have said they are angry about GOD. Just like the sig says. If it wasn't true you would not have posted about it. You would have just blown it off.

I accept your concession.

[floke]

I agree with Mhancoc7.

Lets just agree that I was right and end the thread.

[HareBall]

I agree with Mhancoc7.

Lets just agree that I was right and end the thread.

Your right and your irrational.

[mhancoc7]

Ok, I think it is time to close the thread.
Jereme

[mysticrider92]

Ok, I think it is time to close the thread.
Jereme

+1

Please just keep these threads about the original topic instead of debating things. I really don't want to see this subforum stopped.

[eric_n_va]

Well, I think it is great that Jereme has created a distribution which has encouraged someone to come to Ubuntu. More power to you, Jereme. And I hope eric_n_va isn't put off asking for help on here by the unnecessary (IMHO) comments.

I am not a CE user, but I can see it's value. I don't use KDE either, but I'm glad they both exist to suit people who want what they offer.

As for eric_n_va, remember there is more rejoicing in heaven over one repentant windows user... :)

"Repentant Windows user..." too funny. And no I'm not put off at all I've just been busy learning the ropes :). Thanks for the encouragement!

[eponymous]

i use the atheist version of ubuntu.
it's called Edgy Eft, check it out.

[aysiu]

i use the atheist version of ubuntu.
it's called Edgy Eft, check it out.
Atheism is a belief that God does not exist.

I don't see how Edgy Eft relates to that in any way.

[Death_Sargent]

A START BUTTON im sorry but that speaks blasphemy to all things gnome and linux.

Atleast KDE has to good dignity not to call it START.

Microsoft should sue just to punish them for contaminating our world with a proprietary trade mark that stands for licensed software.

[doobit]

A START BUTTON im sorry but that speaks blasphemy to all things gnome and linux.

Atleast KDE has to good dignity not to call it START.

Microsoft should sue just to punish them for contaminating our world with a proprietary trade mark that stands for licensed software.

Yeah, maybe an "In The Beginning" button would be better...:D

[iMav]

Yeah, maybe an "In The Beginning" button would be better...:D
Too funny!! :)

[clean97gti]

Yeah, maybe an "In The Beginning" button would be better...:D
Personally, I'd prefer one that simply said BANG! in 36pt font.

I may just include that in my free thinkers edition of Ubuntu.
TrUbuntu has a nice ring to it. :wink:

[iMav]

A "Christian" version of software sounds like something of a joke in itself though. At least to me anyway...
Well, from what I understand, it is not a collection of "Christian versions" of software. It is a distribution tailored to the Christian community which include software that Christians are likely to want/enjoy/etc. (Bible programs such as e-sword, web filtering software, etc) Additionally, this distro includes some customizations and applications that help the new linux user more easily make the switch from Windows (IEs4Linux, OpenOffice, etc).

Personally, I don't use the distro, but am interested in some of the included applications (the e-sword installer is GREAT; and I am also interested in DansGuardian as well).

[jinx099]

Didn't the "Edgy" version of Ubuntu CE just recently get released? I just don't see why anyone would feel the need to use the "CE" edition, do they need to constantly remind themselves of their faith? Christianity has nothing to do with an OS, it just doesn't make sense.

From some of the comments I've read earlier in the thread, it seems that the goal is to get the Christian community drawn to Linux and Ubuntu. But, would a Christian really be more likely to use Ubuntu or any other OS if there was a "Christian Edition". This seems very self-righteous to me.

Will a Ubuntu CE user please explain why you use Ubuntu CE over Ubuntu.

[mhancoc7]

Didn't the "Edgy" version of Ubuntu CE just recently get released? I just don't see why anyone would feel the need to use the "CE" edition, do they need to constantly remind themselves of their faith? Christianity has nothing to do with an OS, it just doesn't make sense.

From some of the comments I've read earlier in the thread, it seems that the goal is to get the Christian community drawn to Linux and Ubuntu. But, would a Christian really be more likely to use Ubuntu or any other OS if there was a "Christian Edition". This seems very self-righteous to me.

Will a Ubuntu CE user please explain why you use Ubuntu CE over Ubuntu.

I hope that an Ubuntu CE users will answer your question. I have one question of my own.

Have you even searched th forum for an answer to your question? The reason that I ask is that this question has been posed ad-nauseum.

Jereme

[iMav]

Didn't the "Edgy" version of Ubuntu CE just recently get released? I just don't see why anyone would feel the need to use the "CE" edition, do they need to constantly remind themselves of their faith? Christianity has nothing to do with an OS, it just doesn't make sense.

From some of the comments I've read earlier in the thread, it seems that the goal is to get the Christian community drawn to Linux and Ubuntu. But, would a Christian really be more likely to use Ubuntu or any other OS if there was a "Christian Edition". This seems very self-righteous to me.

Will a Ubuntu CE user please explain why you use Ubuntu CE over Ubuntu.
As I've stated before, I don't use the CE version over "vanilla" Ubuntu. But I certainly wouldn't be opposed to doing so.

Do Christians need to be constantly reminded of their faith? In this world...ABSOLUTELY! As a Christian, my faith is most definitely applicable to every aspect of my life. An OS that is tailored with bundled tools that allow me to easily study His word is GREAT.

My question to you is, why do you care one way or the other? And, are you as equally curious/skeptical/etc of the Muslim/Satanic/etc Ubuntu editions?

[Glennji]

I don't see any harm in having BOTH a "{sig}-kit" for the (sic) canonical distribution, and a standalone "Ubuntu {sig} edition" for publication within a special-interest group -- indeed I think there is a place for both! How hard is it to provide them?

I would assume (and this may be an error) that composing a "new" version involves selecting and customising the apps & packages, and therefore creating a "dummy" package with various dependencies would actually be easier than building a Live-CD (from scratch or with reconstructor, which looks great by the way).

Nor is there any reason to limit it to religion -- there are many SIG's which could distribute Ubuntu software in both "kit" (i.e. package) and "edition" (i.e. live CD ISO) form.

Even the various "types" of Ubuntu that currently exist would benefit from offering "kit" and "edition" forms, I think -- Ubuntu KDE kit vs Kubuntu; Ubuntu XFace-kit vs Xubuntu; the list goes on ...

Might have a play with reconstructor now! :)

[PriceChild]

_Please_ don't question whether Ubuntu derivatives should exist... they do and anyone is welcome to start one if they wish. The issue has been done to death already.

Any further posts on that subject will be Jailed at least.

Pricey

[aysiu]

I agree. People vehemently proclaiming that derivatives shouldn't exist are fighting a hopeless battle (there is nothing legally or practically you can do to stop people modifying or forking Ubuntu) and serve only to stir up bad feelings in the community. If you don't like a derivative, don't use it. Vote with your CD burner.

And if you think you're making original points and need to be heard, read this thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=233375). All your points have been heard, and they don't change anything. Satanic Edition, Christian Edition, Muslim Edition, Ultimate Edition, Mint, etc. all exist and will continue to exist as long as someone maintains them and someone other people use them.

[SunnyRabbiera]

I want a ubuntu flying spaghetti monster edition :D

[aysiu]

I want a ubuntu flying spaghetti monster edition :D
Then make it. Reconstructor (http://reconstructor.aperantis.com/) is actually not that difficult to use.

[SunnyRabbiera]

I am just goofing, lightening the mood a bit :D

[jinx099]

Everyone states in this thread how this topic has been done to death, and I agree. But I bet the reason why the issue comes up so much is because nobody on the forums understands the point of CE.

Furthermore, I'd post in the linked thread, but its locked. Since this has been discussed before, does that mean nobody is allowed to talk about it again?

[aysiu]

Since this has been discussed before, does that mean nobody is allowed to talk about it again? I don't know that that's policy, but I don't see how that would be a bad idea.

It's not so much that it has been discussed before but mainly that it's been discussed before, the discussion often gets overly heated, and there's nothing fruitful that comes about from the discussion, nor do objections to these projects actually stop the projects from existing.

In other words, objections to religious versions (or any other derivatives of Ubuntu):
1. Stir up emotions and create more tension than existed before
2. Do not actually stop the creators from making or maintaining the derivatives or stop the people who use the derivatives from enjoying them

In other words, there are no positive outcomes from these objections proliferating. They have existed. People expressed what they had to express. Everyone's heard the objections. Let's move on.

Even reason #2 alone has closed all discussion on animated GIFs in signatures, the forum's use of proprietary software (VBulletin), and the proposal to have user ratings on helpfulness.

[23meg]

But I bet the reason why the issue comes up so much is because nobody on the forums understands the point of CE.

The reason is that those who keep bringing it up don't understand how Free software works in general, and how Ubuntu religious derivatives have operated so far specifically.


Furthermore, I'd post in the linked thread, but its locked. Since this has been discussed before, does that mean nobody is allowed to talk about it again?

It means that you'll just be ranting without accomplishing anything, and in doing that, spreading negative vibe that's uncalled for.

[floke]

This is, of course, the usual line that we get from this debate. It goes like this:

(1) People objecting to religious variants only object due to the religious aspect.

(-) WRONG: Maybe some do, but I would also - not object - but harbour concerns about anything (as I've said before) that was potentially divisive on religious, social, political or economic grounds. The 'objection' is not a religious one, so stop trying to claim that it is. I know some religious people have a desire to feel victimised in order to legitimise their faith - and I'm not saying that anyone here is doing this - but this is not the point that's being raised as I see it.

(2) The divisions and bad vibes are only being caused by those who object. Therefore please stop objecting, you're causing an awful lot of trouble and we aren't going to go away you know....

(-) WRONG: The logic of this is this: I'm going to do whatever I like, and if you object to it then you're the one causing trouble, even if I started it. This is 'blame' (not the right word but the best that appears on the spot) reversal that a six year old would see through. The whole 'argument' of people in favour of religious variants is thus: Stop criticising us you intolerant fools. No further objections are to be allowed (so who's being intolerant)?

(3) People who object to this don't understand the GPL.

(-) WRONG: We understand it perfectly. No one's questioning the right of religious variants to exist or their legitimacy. This is a silly point that's not even worth rebutting.

My personal attitude on this has softened somewhat recently. I can see the point, and accept that it might be beneficial, if it encourages others to adopt Linux. At least I am flexible, willing to question my own beliefs, and adjust to the evidence. The worst thing about this debate, though, is really the way that it gets framed. Setting up the 'opposition' as a straw man really doesn't wash. So if we're going to have a discussion at least lets be clear what we're discussing. Otherwise there's no point at all.

[aysiu]

Substantiate your arguments with some evidence Steve.K

[floke]

Well you can read the above posts.

Also the arguments presented here: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=377354

And here (a bit lighter): http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=387237

And probably various other places too.

There seems to be a lot of 'Well we think its a bit silly etc. but whatever...' - which seems to be the main 'objection' from people. I don't recall seeing anything in any of these threads that says CE etc. shouldn't exist (ok one of the above posts got jailed - but its seems to be an exceptional view).

Your own rational also seems to prove the point; one of your main themes being that no-one objected to Kubuntu etc, but then CE came out and there was an uproar (so to speak). So what this shows is: (1) Situation fine; (2) CE comes out; (3) people get upset/object/etc. - How you can then extrapolate from this that its the objections that are the source of the unease is a logical backflip, since (2) which led directly to (3) - and since (3) would not have happened in the absence of (2) - you cannot then claim that (3) is the cause of the bad vibes.

[23meg]

(1) People objecting to religious variants only object due to the religious aspect.

(-) WRONG: Maybe some do, but I would also - not object - but harbour concerns about anything (as I've said before) that was potentially divisive on religious, social, political or economic grounds. The 'objection' is not a religious one, so stop trying to claim that it is. I know some religious people have a desire to feel victimised in order to legitimise their faith - and I'm not saying that anyone here is doing this - but this is not the point that's being raised as I see it.

People have raised concerns about all derivatives, mostly due to a lack of understanding of how they work, but the debate around religious ones has been more heated. I take the same line regarding all of them: point to the license, and the actual utilization, if any. Religious versions do comply with the licenses they inherit, do get official permission to use the Ubuntu name, and have seen actual demand. People are actually using them. That's enough reason for them to exist.

As for divisiveness, they're as divisive as LoCo teams and language packs are.

(2) The divisions and bad vibes are only being caused by those who object. Therefore please stop objecting, you're causing an awful lot of trouble and we aren't going to go away you know....

No, rather: "By reiterating the same arguments against the legitimacy of derivatives, instead of reading through the discussions that already took place and seeing the basis on which they were refuted, you're asking to be taken as if you were making a very original point that nobody made before. If you keep insisting on doing that, people who disagree with you keep insisting on disproving your points, and in the process, people who are sensitive about religion for whatever reason sometimes let their sensitivities take priority over the customs of licensing that are what determines the legitimacy of derivatives at the end of the day. This results in unfruitful discussions that don't lead anywhere."

Sure, religious and other derivatives aren't going anywhere, but that's not because "we", who argue here that they're legitimate, say so, or because the project leaders of the derivatives say so. It's because the licenses that govern how the software can be redistributed and relabeled, that were put in place by the individual software authors themselves, say so.

(-) WRONG: The logic of this is this: I'm going to do whatever I like, and if you object to it then you're the one causing trouble, even if I started it. This is 'blame' (not the right word but the best that appears on the spot) reversal that a six year old would see through. The whole 'argument' of people in favour of religious variants is thus: Stop criticising us you intolerant fools. No further objections are to be allowed (so who's being intolerant)?


I'll take the liberty to reword your interpretation of what I and aysiu said, which I find pretty offensive:

The logic of it is: religious and other derivatives are going to do whatever they like, within the boundaries of the licenses that govern the terms under which the software they're dealing with can be redistributed, and within the commonly accepted norms and modus operandi of the Free software community. Starting a derivative isn't "starting trouble"; the whole argument of people in favour of religious and non-religious variants here is thus: stop stirring the same unfruitful debate; if you object to legitimate derivatives that people are actually using, you're objecting to the whole point of free redistributability of Free software. If you'd like to keep objecting, we expect that you come up with original points that haven't been addressed before.

This shouldn't be too much to ask for, under any context. Nobody is calling you "intolerant fools", or trying to forbid discussion of derivatives altogether forcefully, so I'll take that as a straw man argument.

(3) People who object to this don't understand the GPL.

(-) We understand it perfectly. No one's questioning the right of religious variants to exist or their legitimacy. This is a silly point that's not even worth rebutting.

The only line that exists between the legitimacy of a derivative as governed by the license(s) that concern it, and whether or not it's socially warranted and feasible, is actual utilization. If a derivative is legitimate as governed by the license, but practically useless, it will die out due to lack of interest from its projected user base; some refer to this as natural selection. If as a gesture to test reactions, I changed four pixels in the default Ubuntu wallpaper and called it "Ubuntu Different Wallpaper Edition", it would be completely legitimate, but a completely useless effort as well.

Religious derivatives have seen actual demand, and are being utilized. If in spite of knowing that they're legitimate, and that they're being utilized, you're still arguing against them, then what precisely are you arguing against? The lack of any other substantial argument makes me tend to think you're effectively arguing against the freedom of people to redistribute software as they see fit, hence arguing against the main point of the GPL and similar licenses, even if that's not your intention.

My personal attitude on this has softened somewhat recently. I can see the point, and accept that it might be beneficial, if it encourages others to adopt Linux. At least I am flexible, willing to question my own beliefs, and adjust to the evidence. The worst thing about this debate, though, is really the way that it gets framed. Setting up the 'opposition' as a straw man really doesn't wash.

Nobody here is inflexible or not welcoming different opinions. The argument against further discussion of the legitimacy of derivatives (and that's not what you were discussing?) stems from the fact that we're just tired of seeing the same discussion over and over again, especially when it's causing bad vibes, and has no potential to produce any outcome. There are enough condescending statements in your very post that would have caused bad vibes, had I chosen to reply to them.

So if we're going to have a discussion at least lets be clear what we're discussing. Otherwise there's no point at all.

I agree; let's be clear what we're discussing, and if it's been discussed before, and we're just reiterating the old arguments, it's a waste of time and energy; let's move on.

[floke]

23Meg. This is the kind of thing I'm on about...

By reiterating the same arguments against the legitimacy of derivatives,

There you go. Criticising an argument that I have never made. Please show me where I have ever questioned the legitimacy of derivatives to exist. Please show me where I have ever 'reiterated' such an argument. If you read my posts above you will find that I very explicitly: (a) Accept fully their legitimacy under the GPL; and (2) Fully support their right to exist under the terms of the GPL.

you're asking to be taken as if you were making a very original point that nobody made before. If you keep insisting on doing that, people who disagree with you keep insisting on disproving your points

I'm not trying to make any original points at all (although I notice that nobody levelled this argument against the way I posed the 'moral dilemma' earlier). In fact, I'm not here making any points about derivatives whatsoever. The point I'm making concerns the way the debate gets framed: that people who object to, are concerned about, uneasy with derivatives are labelled as being 'sensitive about religion' as you put it, or intolerant. In short, nobody has, or can, 'disprove' any of the points I made about derivatives, since I didn't actually make any.

If you'd like to keep objecting, we expect that you come up with original points that haven't been addressed before.

There you go again. I'm not objecting and am not putting forward original points. Please read the above posts from earlier.

Nobody is calling you "intolerant fools", or trying to forbid discussion of derivatives altogether forcefully

So why are further discussions about the legitimacy of derivatives to be jailed. That seems to 'forbid discussion' quite well.

If in spite of knowing that they're legitimate, and that they're being utilized, you're still arguing against them, then what precisely are you arguing against?

I'm not. See above again.

The lack of any other substantial argument makes me tend to think you're effectively arguing against the freedom of people to redistribute software as they see fit .

Again, read above posts where I explcitly support their legitimacy etc.

The argument against further discussion of the legitimacy of derivatives (and that's [i]not what you were discussing?)

....and again....

I'll take the liberty to reword your interpretation of what I and aysiu said, which I find pretty offensive

Apologies if that was the case. Wasn't meant to be. Passionate, yes. Offensive no. Sorry.

There are enough condescending statements in your very post that would have caused bad vibes, had I chosen to reply to them.

Seems like quite an extensive reply to me. But apologies again if it seemed condescending.

The logic of it is: religious and other derivatives are going to do whatever they like, within the boundaries of the licenses that govern the terms under which the software they're dealing with can be redistributed, and within the commonly accepted norms and modus operandi of the Free software community

Here we get to the whole point. I completely agree and have said so. I have stayed away from this thread until tonight since I think there's nothing more to be said on it. There's no debate to be had as far as I'm concerned. If others want to question their legitimacy then that's up to them, but I'm not one of them. My post above was about the framing of the debate, which I think your rhetoric against my non existant argument serves to demonstrate quite well. Maybe you misinterpreted what I said, or maybe I didn't make myself clear enough. If not then I apologise for that, since in no way is my intention to cause bad feelings. The call was for clarity in the debate, not about the legitimacy of derivatives.

In fact, I have a Christian relative coming to visit in a couple of days and I'm seriously thinking about downloading the CE to give to them.

Don't tell anyone I said that :)

[jinx099]

In fact, I have a Christian relative coming to visit in a couple of days and I'm seriously thinking about downloading the CE to give to them.

Maybe you could take advantage of this and perform a "test" on them. Burn a standard Ubuntu CD for them and offer it to them, maybe even show them your Ubuntu install. If they refuse your offer, offer them Ubuntu CE and see if they reconsider. :)

[23meg]

There you go. Criticising an argument that I have never made. Please show me where I have ever questioned the legitimacy of derivatives to exist. Please show me where I have ever 'reiterated' such an argument. If you read my posts above you will find that I very explicitly: (a) Accept fully their legitimacy under the GPL; and (2) Fully support their right to exist under the terms of the GPL.

Well, it's you who's misplacing the argument. My first rewording in quotes addressed your point (2), which I quoted (it's the second quote in my previous post), which in turn speaks on behalf of those who spoke in favour of derivatives, and not stirring the same debate. I thought it misinterpreted what was said, so I chose to reword it, but "you" in my rewording did not refer to you in person, but those who insist on stirring the same debate in general.

I'm not trying to make any original points at all (although I notice that nobody levelled this argument against the way I posed the 'moral dilemma' earlier). In fact, I'm not here making any points about derivatives whatsoever. The point I'm making concerns the way the debate gets framed: that people who object to, are concerned about, uneasy with [insert description here] derivatives are labelled as being 'sensitive about religion' as you put it, or intolerant. In short, nobody has, or can, 'disprove' any of the points I made about derivatives, since I didn't actually make any.

There you go again. I'm not objecting and am not putting forward original points. Please read the above posts from earlier.

That's what I expect people to do if they'd like to continue the discussion: make a point, and an original one at that, because the issue has been done to death already. The discussion is being framed in the same way other unoriginal, unfruitful, heated discussions that have no potential to produce any outcome have been framed: it's uncalled for. This is as clear as I can put it: in the forums that I've frequented for a long time, I don't want to see people wasting time and energy on a discussion in which they aren't putting forward anything original, one that can't change anything whatsoever, and hurting each other and spreading bad vibes in the process.

By the way, I didn't label people who are concerned about derivatives as "sensitive about religion" altogether; I said that during the discussions, people sometimes gave their religious sensitivities priority over licensing.

So why are further discussions about the legitimacy of derivatives to be jailed. That seems to 'forbid discussion' quite well.

I'm not in favour of jailing them; they'd best be thrown into a megathread that only those who want to beat the dead horse care about, similar to the Linux desktop readiness thread.

I'm not. See above again.

You're not arguing against anything at all, you're all settled, all fine with religious derivatives; you don't think they're divisive (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=2256263&postcount=26) any longer either, even if you said in your last reply that you'd "harbor concerns" against anything that can be potentially divisive; good to know. Many other things can be potentially divisive, and I'm glad we're not a bunch that gets easily "divided" in a way that causes trouble by differences.

Apologies if that was the case. Wasn't meant to be. Passionate, yes. Offensive no. Sorry.

Seems like quite an extensive reply to me. But apologies again if it seemed condescending.

What I meant was that I deliberately avoided addressing the parts I found condescending; I replied to them as if they were made in a polite manner instead of picking on them and replying as "passionately". You see that happening often in discussions of this sort; bad vibes? You bet. Apology taken.

Here we get to the whole point. I completely agree and have said so. I have stayed away from this thread until tonight since I think there's nothing more to be said on it. There's no debate to be had as far as I'm concerned. If others want to question their legitimacy then that's up to them, but I'm not one of them.

You've posted to this thread for the first time tonight; I think you mean the Muslim Edition thread. Again, I wasn't picking on you in person as the one who questions the legitimacy of derivatives, but I was talking about those who did. My use of the pronoun may have been too liberal; sorry about that if that's the case, but I hadn't meant it that way.

My post above was about the framing of the debate, which I think your rhetoric against my non existant argument serves to demonstrate quite well. Maybe you misinterpreted what I said, or maybe I didn't make myself clear enough. If not then I apologise for that, since in no way is my intention to cause bad feelings. The call was for clarity in the debate, not about the legitimacy of derivatives.

I've made my position on the framing of the debate clear, and again, none of what I said was meant as personal.

[Ptero-4]

A START BUTTON im sorry but that speaks blasphemy to all things gnome and linux.

Atleast KDE has to good dignity not to call it START.

Microsoft should sue just to punish them for contaminating our world with a proprietary trade mark that stands for licensed software.

Can you tell me what`s that "START button" you talk about and where (in Ubuntu) you saw it?


what does software have to do with religion? HUH?

If not about religion then ,

How about an ubuntu american edition ? ubuntu iraq edition? ubuntu windows edition?


How can people use the name like this?

The name will lose identity in no time.

There`s an ubuntu windoze edition already, it`s called Kubuntu.


Rashid, that sounds awesome and I think you should go for it. I doubt it would get more controversy than my religion... yeah, I can just see the American Religious Right foaming at the mouth when they hear Ubuntu Pagan Edition (Cerunnos wallpapers optional of course).

But in all seriousness, what do all these religious versions provide that Ubuntu and Kubuntu does not. I do know that Ubuntu CE contains a bible on but that is easily fatched from the repos. I could imagine a large part of the distro maintience would have to go around artwork and making it look divine---well as divine as a computer program can look.

Anyways, I do hope that this will lead to (if this is allowed in Islam) an electronic version of the Koran. Maybe some fundie(s) will take the time to read or skim through it one day and realise Pat Robinson and Rush Limbaugh are not credible sources when it comes to its interpretation nor are they an authority on the subject of Islam.

Peace out.

You might be interested in using this beauty in your artwork if you wish:
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b43/Ptero-4/Backgrounds/Nadia.jpg

[peoples_opium]

There's a christian edition a muslim edition even a satanic version so why no pagan edition or agnostic version?

[tgm4883]

So make one. Also notice that none of those are officially recognized

[chrisLACHCIK5084]

no point in making any other version but the best one they already got...Ubuntu 7.04 :)


or 6.10 if you wanna have a stable edition

[tgm4883]

no point in making any other version but the best one they already got...Ubuntu 7.04 :)


or 6.10 if you wanna have a stable edition

Thats not really relevant as this is more of a flavor discussion not a version discussion. Such as Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Edubuntu.

[blackspyder]

Technically wouldnt the Original Ubuntu suffice. I mean it's not biased toward any one religion.

[aysiu]

You want it, you make it.

That's what the makers of Muslim and Christian Editions did.

Those are both community-supported versions of Ubuntu. They are not official branches like Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, and Edubuntu.

[starcraft.man]

I really don't see what the point in those special christian and muslim editions were anyway, just like the ultimate edition it was a package that had a different theme/icon set and some extra packages (chrisitian and muslim specific packages I suppose, like a bible program and koran(sp?) program respectively). None of the programs I saw in either was specific to them only, and thus they are both irrelevant.

To me, it only serves to incite segmentation of the Ubuntu community. Like every subgroup needs its own branch, its own version, to use in its own corner of Ubuntu. Rather than everyone having the same Ubuntu out of box and customizing it to suit their needs. I am glad they aren't endorsed by Ubuntu, we need to be all together as Ubuntu users, not separated by our faith, ethnicity or other trait.

Remember, Ubuntu's slogan is "Linux for Human Beings", thats everyone last time I checked, not just one section of humans. Thats my opinion anyway, if you really want to, compile your own version and host it via bit torrent or some other means, enjoy >.>.

[mrgnash]

There's a christian edition a muslim edition even a satanic version so why no pagan edition or agnostic version?

Agnostic version? What would that entail?

We already have a secular version, it's called Ubuntu 7.04. It even has a distinctly humanist flavour, so I see no reason to complain.

[aysiu]

Remember, Ubuntu's slogan is "Linux for Human Beings", thats everyone last time I checked, not just one section of humans. Thats my opinion anyway, if you really want to, compile your own version and host it via bit torrent or some other means, enjoy >.>. Uh, that's what people did. They made their own versions and hosted those versions themselves. None of those religious editions are official Ubuntu releases. They are all do-it-yourself/host-it-yourself projects. And last time I checked, human beings were allowed to have religious needs.

[starcraft.man]

Uh, that's what people did. They made their own versions and hosted those versions themselves. None of those religious editions are official Ubuntu releases. They are all do-it-yourself/host-it-yourself projects. And last time I checked, human beings were allowed to have religious needs.

I know that they were unofficial and not ubuntu releases and that people compiled them on their own. What I was trying to get at is I believe that the very existence of them, is a form/cause of unnecessary segmentation within the Ubuntu community, and from such segmentation there comes conflict. It makes it seem like every ethnicity creed and religion needs its own edition of Ubuntu, own forums, own section of the web. In my mind at least, Ubuntu is about being one big planet/population/community of people together not being individual groups of people in a collective. I think theres a difference. Also, another point of contention to think of, the average user (ones who do not take careful note of whats official and not, there are many of those, I've seen at least 30 posts wondering why Ubuntu hasn't release a new Feisty Ultimate Edition here) will just see Chrisitan Edition and Muslim Edition, and my not grasp the difference from official and not. Just another thing to think of.

I won't pass comment on human beings having religions needs. I don't have any (I suppose I'm an atheist because of that) and I find my life no less fulfilling enjoyable (whether it be hacking linux, talking to friends, playing games, working on projects, none of my actions involve God), I personally don't think its needed. I won't get into religion any further, it is a discussion that would cause a cascade of topics to rise in a never ending discussion about god and other things related.

Anyway, thats that... I think I go now from this thread, I should know better and avoid the religion related topics >.>.

[aysiu]

All I'll say is that I agree that it's confusing. I would never have approved using the Ubuntu name for these projects (the Christian Edition did get approval to use the name; not sure about the Muslim one), but I do agree that the projects should be allowed to exist. The special configuration serves a population's needs, and that's in the spirit of Ubuntu. Ubuntu is not about homogeneity. Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'Humanity to others', or 'I am what I am because of who we all are'. The Ubuntu distribution brings the spirit of Ubuntu to the software world. I am what I am because of who we all are, not I'm glad everyone else is exactly like me.

The religious editions are not for converting Ubuntu users to Islam or Christianity. They're for helping Muslims and Christians see that Ubuntu can suit their software needs, and nothing demonstrates that better than a customized live CD, which is well within both the terms and the spirit of the GPL.

[aysiu]

By the way, that's about my last response on this topic. This topic has been done to death. If you don't believe me, read these threads:
Ubuntu Satanic Edition - Released (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=318148&highlight=religious+editions)
Ubuntu religious versions? (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=318487&highlight=religious+editions)
Ubuntume - Ubuntu muslim edition (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=377354&highlight=religious+editions)
Ubuntu trademark policy - Will ME and CE need to change their names? (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=423292&highlight=religious+editions)
Ubuntu "Christian Edition" [technical discussion] (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=218724)
Ubuntu "Christian Edition" rant (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=233375)

Happy reading!

[starcraft.man]

By the way, that's about my last response on this topic. This topic has been done to death. If you don't believe me, read these threads:
Ubuntu Satanic Edition - Released (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=318148&highlight=religious+editions)
Ubuntu religious versions? (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=318487&highlight=religious+editions)
Ubuntume - Ubuntu muslim edition (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=377354&highlight=religious+editions)
Ubuntu trademark policy - Will ME and CE need to change their names? (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=423292&highlight=religious+editions)
Ubuntu "Christian Edition" [technical discussion] (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=218724)
Ubuntu "Christian Edition" rant (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=233375)

Happy reading!

EGAD!!!! Thats it, never ever posting again in anything related to religion ever (after this)... I don't have the energy or desire for such discussion (I can't believe those people have so much). I guess I will just do my best to make sure people don't get confused by all the uh, editions... >.>.

[dbbolton]

who wants to join my new project- ubuntu daoist edition ?

it's going to be the same as regular ubuntu, except with spirits instead of daemons. those belong in the satanic edition.

[dhruva023]

what i think is,

instade of putting energy on those edition, why not they join to ubuntu developer team and try to improve ubuntu it self.

by doing this , we can solve bug no. 1 more earlier then excepted.

[parker13]

Let me add a couple of points to this discussion.

Ubuntu is a single disc distro. This is a simple but great feature as it makes it very quick and easy to get the base system up and running.

Ubuntu also has very advanced package management, making it possible, for example, to very easily install the KDE desktop on top of an Ubuntu installation, effectively turning it into Kubuntu with a few strokes of the keyboard. For this reason, all of the Ubuntu variants are pretty much superfluous.

However, this assumes that you have a decent Internet connection, that you can be bothered customizing your system and that you know what you're doing. That's where the Ubuntu variants come in to play - if you want KDE or a multimedia focus or even evil looking wallpaper then there's a distro for you. Someone else has gone to the bother of packaging it up for you onto a nice shiny disc.

[marco123]

who wants to join my new project- ubuntu daoist edition ?

it's going to be the same as regular ubuntu, except with spirits instead of daemons. those belong in the satanic edition.

ROFL

[jeffc313]

why not just make your own pagan repo if you are pagan and have friends or family who share beliefs with you point them to your packages.

[urukrama]

there we go again...

[dbbolton]

ROFL
i'm glad someone has realised that i wasn't being serious.

[shen-an-doah]

who wants to join my new project- ubuntu daoist edition ?

it's going to be the same as regular ubuntu, except with spirits instead of daemons. those belong in the satanic edition.

How about Zenbuntu? You just think about running Linux...

[Adamant1988]

Actually, the satanic edition has some kickass artwork.

[mhancoc7]

Go for it! If there is an audience for it then it will thrive, if not it will disappear.

I am just amazed that these threads continue to be started when there are already several, listed earlier by aysiu, in the forums. I guess the Search (http://ubuntuforums.org/search.php) function is under used. :)

Jereme

[Bartender]

The pirates should get to work on a Flying Spaghetti Monster edition of Ubuntu. That's pirates as in "Arrr, maties", not software pirates.

[steveneddy]

Yeah - you know, after reading all of the threads, and reading this thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=454913),

I'm going to suggest a steveneddy version of Ubuntu.

Eddybuntu

I automatically logs on to various forums sites to make it easier for you to post comments on blogger sites.

-SE

[RAV TUX]

There's a christian edition a muslim edition even a satanic version so why no pagan edition or agnostic version?Just do it!

I think a Zoroastrianism version would be cool.

[mhancoc7]

The pirates should get to work on a Flying Spaghetti Monster edition of Ubuntu. That's pirates as in "Arrr, maties", not software pirates.

http://www.linuxformat.co.uk/blog/?p=266

[mech7]

Im gonna build a Ubuntu Amish Edition, and i am going to spread it for free on my horse and carriage.

[Bartender]

Hey, thanks, mhancoc7, I will now proceed to wipe Ubuntu, MEPIS, Xubuntu, PCLOS, etc. from all hard drives and convert to the one true...

Hey, wait a minute, this came out on April Fools' Day.

I don't know how I feel about someone having a laugh at His Noodleness' s expense. Can Pastafarians declare fatwahs?

[Mateo]

I think there is some misunderstanding here. The Christian edition has religious software on it. Same for the muslim edition. As far as I'm aware, there aren't any pagan software out there.

[RAV TUX]

http://www.linuxformat.co.uk/blog/?p=266

I love the artwork for the logo...

http://ubuntuforums.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=33680&d=1180366436

[Happy_Man]

Tell me now, what would be considered "pagan"?

[starcraft.man]

Pagan on wikipedia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paganism)

[esaym]

Tell me now, what would be considered "pagan"?

Beats me.

In my opinion this thread is full of people that are against the spread of Christianity and instead want to promote there own religion, mainly atheism. Although atheist say atheism is not a religion, it is indeed and for some reason it is heavily promoted on internet forums. Strange phenomena :D


Pagan on wikipedia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paganism)
I think he was referring to what kind of special software that pagans would need to have, if any.

[Mateo]

there are pagan books and stuff but i don't think there is any software about it.

[Ebuntor]

Im gonna build a Ubuntu Amish Edition, and i am going to spread it for free on my horse and carriage.

ROFL, so how are you going to distribute it without cd's? Write down the binary code on paper, all ones and zeros? ;) How are you gonna run it without a computer for that matter? :p Yeah I think this will be great a succes.

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/374/ubuntuamishzj9.jpg
Ubuntu Amish Edition

[Bartender]

In my opinion this thread is full of people that are against the spread of Christianity and instead want to promote there own religion, mainly atheism.

Perhaps this thread is full of people who have had their fill of ism's and were hoping that dogma could be left out of discussions regarding OSS

No such luck

[starcraft.man]

Beats me.

In my opinion this thread is full of people that are against the spread of Christianity and instead want to promote there own religion, mainly atheism. Although atheist say atheism is not a religion, it is indeed and for some reason it is heavily promoted on internet forums.


I know I said I wouldn't post in this or other religious threads again, but that comment I do have to correct, it is very wrong. First off, no version of Ubuntu or any other linux distribution should be used to convert people to religion X, EVER. Fullstop. People should convert or learn a religion because they choose so, of their own volition without being preached to or threatened with X happening to them otherwise. I personally couldn't care less what religion you are, or wish to believe in.

That said, the reason I assume atheism is spread via the internet, is because it (the internet) is a technology, technology is founded on science, which in turn supports the views of Evolution (proven by science as well) and as such, I think a lot of people simply can't believe in religion if they know and believe in Evolution. They are farily incompatible views of life, at least from my point of view (unless you systematically pick and choose certain parts of religion, which IMO, isn't religion).

Please don't make unfounded statements about me, other forum members or linux/Ubuntu.

[shen-an-doah]

That said, the reason I assume atheism is spread via the internet, is because it (the internet) is a technology, technology is founded on science, which in turn supports the views of Evolution (proven by science as well) and as such, I think a lot of people simply can't believe in religion if they know and believe in Evolution. They are farily incompatible views of life, at least from my point of view (unless you systematically pick and choose certain parts of religion, which IMO, isn't religion).

Sorry, but you're talking ********. a) Saying that atheism is a belief in science rather than religion is wrong. Atheism is the belief that there isn't a God. You could just as easily believe the world runs on magic and still not believe in God. b) Belief in science and religion are not mutually exclusive. Are you saying that Christians don't believe in gravity? c) Science has proven nothing. Science has come up with theories that explain things as well as possible, but are not irrefutable. Evolution is one of these theories that is the furthest from being "proven". There is no evidence to fully support a direct link between apes and man (by which I mean fossil evidence of the various stages, there are still large gaps).

Exactly how do you think believing in (a) God negates believing in the fundamental laws of the universe? Just because it is the belief of some people, doesn't mean it's impossible to believe otherwise.

[starcraft.man]

Don't curse at me (or anyone else on these forums), I don't aim to incite anger from anyone. Next time maybe I shouldn't bother posting in these threads... I will defend myself though, because I don't like your tone, and I believe you made a few assumptions that are wrong. And in future, you shouldn't post when your angry, I've done that on a few occasions (not on these forums) and it usually lead to bad things.

A) I never meant to imply that atheism is a belief in science, I know full well that it is simply defined as the belief that there is no god (as I know that agnostics believe one can never know the truth, that there really isn't any proof one way or another that god exists). You are right that you could have the irrational belief that the world runs on magic (rather than say electricity), you would of course be rather silly but still an atheist. I meant to imply that from my POV, there is a conflict between science and religion, as they tend to try and explain the same things, through two different means, traditionally at least. And my example was that science is the foundation for much technology, and thus one gets much exposure to it naturally by using technology, and gradually there comes a time when its one or the other.

There has in recent years been an uprising of Cafeteria religion (a term my teacher used often, better explained here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cafeteria_Christianity) in the context of Christianity, applies to all religions though), whereby people choose to believe W and X in a religion and reject Y and Z, and still call themselves followers of that religion. I tend to think this doesn't really count, as it seems to me its cheating, rejecting whats been explained (proven, you might not believe the proof, but others do) by Science and embracing something science cannot prove one way or another. It doesn't seem (to me) like religion should have any need to reject some of its precepts.

B) Nope, I am not saying Christians don't believe in gravity, they could believe that God holds them down to the Earth for all I know (not mocking here, just making example). I'm not implying they believe in either of those possibilities though, nor did I ever reference them in my statement about internet -> science, don't put words in my mouth. In my mind though, they are mutually exclusive, thats the way I see them, as two opposing ways of explaining how the world works. To pick and choose what to believe in from each, seems to me to be a compromise, one I don't think should be made.

C) I'd beg to differ, do you believe in DNA? I assume if you were on the Jury, and a prosecutor told you there was a DNA match (the odds for most matches are 1 in man billions) that proved the defendant had attacked victim X, you would believe him yes? Well, whatever your answer is, I believe in DNA (not implying you do or don't) and that it has been proven and researched to a point where we understand it well enough to use it as a tool for proof. I also know that there have been numerous DNA tests between humans and apes (whichever family is most similar, I do not have the genus name off hand). I choose to think that a (approximately) 99.5% match of DNA means something, and it isn't a coincidence. I do of course acknowledge that God could have just as easily made it such to confuse us, I don't think that DNA and apes are ever directly referenced in any religion to my knowledge. And as for the fossils, I don't think there are that many gaps, I suppose we have different thresholds of proof though.

I'm sorry that you drew so many false conclusions from my statement, it wasn't meant to be a proof of anything in particular. Just a general observation. Strictly speaking though, I never said atheism is belief in science (you read it as that), I meant to infer that believing in science can lead to a scepticism about religion, especially since it often has contradictory explanations than those religion has.

As to your last point, your quite right. You could believe in God and religion, but I think to do that would mean you have to reject some of the things religion has written about since science has explained them, and then you would be following a Cafeteria version. In my mind, like I said, a compromise of that magnitude is not acceptable. I will admit though, I did make a rather brash and wide reaching generalization, and that was my fault.

In closing, I have but one question to pose. If religion and science can coexist, why has almost every religion that I know of to date gone to great lengths to discredit it/suppress its (scientific) knowledge throughout history, the roman catholic church is a prime example (and thats one reference I did make)?

starcraft.man

Note: Thats it I think, off to other things. While I corrected what you said, any further discussion of this topic will be far off the OPs subject of paganism. So I think thats the end of the discussion. And a word for the future, don't post when your mad.

[RudolfMDLT]

I really don't see what the point in those special christian and muslim editions were anyway, just like the ultimate edition it was a package that had a different theme/icon set and some extra packages (chrisitian and muslim specific packages I suppose, like a bible program and koran(sp?) program respectively). None of the programs I saw in either was specific to them only, and thus they are both irrelevant.

To me, it only serves to incite segmentation of the Ubuntu community. Like every subgroup needs its own branch, its own version, to use in its own corner of Ubuntu. Rather than everyone having the same Ubuntu out of box and customizing it to suit their needs. I am glad they aren't endorsed by Ubuntu, we need to be all together as Ubuntu users, not separated by our faith, ethnicity or other trait.

Remember, Ubuntu's slogan is "Linux for Human Beings", thats everyone last time I checked, not just one section of humans. Thats my opinion anyway, if you really want to, compile your own version and host it via bit torrent or some other means, enjoy >.>.

I agree that they might segment Ubuntu a little. But thats the beauty of Opensource. I don't have unlimited downloads so if, lets say Ubuntu Ultimate or Ubuntu Studio can offer most of the things I want on one DVD then I'll gladly buy that specific dvd with the packages I prefer. Because it is Ubuntu and because it is Open source I can do with it what i want and I believe that customizing a distro is a very cool way do expand and broaden it's user base. All the people are still using Ubuntu and ares still using the forums. I do find it annoying when the user base starts there own forum and there is a brain drain on the Original Ubuntu forum, such as Gay Ubuntu (I have nothing against gay people! ) or who ever else.

But yeah - Go ahead and make the Pagan edition one, just tell me, being Christian I'd have Esword and other packages in there, what would pagans have in their distro?

Cheers,
rudolf

[shen-an-doah]

I wasn't mad when I posted that. The day someone over the internet makes me mad probably won't be when I'm sat around in my pyjamas... What the site filtered as a swear word, I wouldn't consider one at all (it's an Anglo-saxon word (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/********)).

As for my statements about gravity and proof and such, those are all hyperbole. I know that some things are virtually proven, but really nothing is fully proven. Not even the fact that the sun rises every day. I just like to make sure people know that. It can mess with your mind if you think too hard about it...

Really I was just contesting your opinion that science and religion can't coexist. I believe in thinking for oneself and forming your own ideas. I believe that following a religion doesn't require blindly believing what was believed a few thousand years ago. According to the bible, pi equals 3. It hasn't taken science to prove that wrong.

But yes, this has moved away from the idea of the thread, but then the idea of the thread wasn't very sensible in the first place...

[Happy_Man]

I wasn't mad when I posted that. The day someone over the internet makes me mad probably won't be when I'm sat around in my pyjamas... What the site filtered as a swear word, I wouldn't consider one at all (it's an Anglo-saxon word (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/********)).

As for my statements about gravity and proof and such, those are all hyperbole. I know that some things are virtually proven, but really nothing is fully proven. Not even the fact that the sun rises every day. I just like to make sure people know that. It can mess with your mind if you think too hard about it...

Really I was just contesting your opinion that science and religion can't coexist. I believe in thinking for oneself and forming your own ideas. I believe that following a religion doesn't require blindly believing what was believed a few thousand years ago. According to the bible, pi equals 3. It hasn't taken science to prove that wrong.

But yes, this has moved away from the idea of the thread, but then the idea of the thread wasn't very sensible in the first place...
Your link doesn't work, the forum has censored that as well.

[shen-an-doah]

what would pagans have in their distro?

It's an interesting question considering the connections between Paganism and nature, having an OS distribution seems to somewhat contradict that, much like the jokes about the Amish version :p

[shen-an-doah]

Your link doesn't work, the forum has censored that as well.

How odd. It's the same word that caused controversy when The Sex Pistols named their album.

[steveneddy]

Gee, whiz.....lighten up, people.

Download your new version of Eddybuntu and surf to your heart's content.

But, of course, you have to post on others BLOGS that look like news sites and be rude. Very rude.

Take care.

God Bless.

-SE

[Boomy]

They need to make an Ubuntu Amish Edition.

[blackspyder]

They need to make an Ubuntu Amish Edition.

I can see a "Dunkard" Edition (dunkard's are a sect of amish that only use technology for buisness purposes) but an Amish edition would go unused. Also who would make it?

[esaym]

I know I said I wouldn't post in this or other religious threads again, but that comment I do have to correct, it is very wrong. First off, no version of Ubuntu or any other linux distribution should be used to convert people to religion X, EVER. Fullstop. People should convert or learn a religion because they choose so, of their own volition without being preached to or threatened with X happening to them otherwise. I personally couldn't care less what religion you are, or wish to believe in.



UbuntuCE is not about spreading chrisitanity. It has some presentation software for churches, dans guardian, themes, and a daily bible quote. However, if no one cared about the spread of christiaity, this thread would not be here. As aysiu has said before, there are many many more variants of ubuntu, yet when one has to do with religion the world stops.


That said, the reason I assume atheism is spread via the internet, is because it (the internet) is a technology, technology is founded on science, which in turn supports the views of Evolution (proven by science as well) and as such, I think a lot of people simply can't believe in religion if they know and believe in Evolution. They are farily incompatible views of life, at least from my point of view (unless you systematically pick and choose certain parts of religion, which IMO, isn't religion).


Thats somewhat the way I see it. But as you have said already, one should not be pressured to convert to any religion. I am sure you don't like preachers knocking on your door to hand you a pamphlet. The same goes for internet forums.

[Ebuntor]

They need to make an Ubuntu Amish Edition.

I already made a new logo for the Amish Edition, I showed it a few posts back. :)

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/374/ubuntuamishzj9.jpg
Ubuntu Amish Edition

[shen-an-doah]

I already made a new logo for the Amish Edition, I showed it a few posts back. :)

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/374/ubuntuamishzj9.jpg
Ubuntu Amish Edition

Comes with Barn Raiser 0.9.2

[mech7]

:D great logo i will definitly include it in UAE :p

[RAV TUX]

:D great logo i will definitly include it in UAE :p

Heres some great Amish Pictures:
http://www.amishphoto.com/galleryindex.htm

[Boomy]

I already made a new logo for the Amish Edition, I showed it a few posts back. :)

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/374/ubuntuamishzj9.jpg
Ubuntu Amish Edition

lmao! :p

[Ebuntor]

:D great logo i will definitely include it in UAE :p

Gee what a honor, thanks. :p
How will you distribute it without cd's or the web? just write the code down on paper? :p:p:p

[Ebuntor]

This might be getting a little lame. I was bored so based upon this (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=296758) excellent poster I made a poster for the Ubuntu Amish Edition. :p

http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/93/amishpostervc3.png

Just to be clear it is not my intention to make fun of the Amish, I'm trying to make a point regarding the Christian, Muslim and Satanic editions.

[mhancoc7]

This might be getting a little lame. I was bored so based upon this (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=296758) excellent poster I made a poster for the Ubuntu Amish Edition. :p

http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/93/amishpostervc3.png

Just to be clear it is not my intention to make fun of the Amish, I'm trying to make a point regarding the Christian, Muslim and Satanic editions.

So, exactly what is your point? Do you not like the idea of providing a user group with tools that they use in order to draw a larger audience to Ubuntu? Do you feel the same way about Kubuntu, Xubuntu, and all of the other variations that only provide a change in window manager/desktop manager?

Just curious.

Jereme

[Ebuntor]

Most of the arguments have already been discussed so I have very little to add actually.


Do you not like the idea of providing a user group with tools that they use in order to draw a larger audience to Ubuntu?

Do I not like the idea? No, actually do I like it and being a Christian myself I fully support it.:)

So, exactly what is your point

The point I'm trying to make is that I think that religion has nothing to do with Ubuntu, other operating systems or software in general. Why? Everything we do here on the forums and with Ubuntu in general is of a pure technical nature, people's religious convictions have nothing to do with it. I think we should keep this separate.

It's for the same reason there's a separation between church and state in western countries. I think the same should apply for having a CE version (or any other religious version) of Ubuntu.

Also religion is a very personal thing for people and some are very easily offended when discussing the subject. That is also why the The backyard section exists and has separate rules. Religious versions of Ubuntu might deter people from switching. Again because of the same reasons there is also a separation between church and state.

Apart from that there's also a personal reason: No offense to the developers I find it distasteful that there is a satanic edition (I assume/hope the makers intended it as a joke). Because the CE has a subforum here the SE and every other religious edition should also have it's own forum.
You'll probably agree with me that will surely deter/offend people.
That is also a good reason to have religion separate.

I made that Amish logo and poster just as a joke to show how ridiculous it would become if every religion and population group would get it's own Ubuntu edition. ;)

I hope I explained my point adequately. :)

I just want to make clear I'm not against the CE or ME, I can understand why it could draw people to Ubuntu and why people find it handy, but I think they shouldn't be identified as separate editions. Maybe as packages.


Do you feel the same way about Kubuntu, Xubuntu, and all of the other variations that only provide a change in window manager/desktop manager?

No I do not, as I explained it's the religious aspect that should be separated. I have used both variants. Just as people are/should be free to choose their own religion they should also be free to choose their own DE's. As you might see from on my avatar

Edit: Mods maybe you should move this thread to the Backyard

[aysiu]

It's for the same reason there's a separation between church and state in western countries. I think the same should apply for having a CE version (or any other religious version) of Ubuntu. I agree as far as naming goes (sorry, Jereme). No religious offshoot should have the word Ubuntu in its name, and I'm a little surprised that Ubuntu approved that name (Ubuntu Christian Edition). But the religious offshoots have every right to exist, just as churches have a right to exist in western countries that have a separation of church and state. Separate is not the same as nonexistent.

I made that Amish logo and poster just as a joke to show how ridiculous it would become if every religion and population group would get it's own Ubuntu edition. ;) I don't think it's ridiculous at all. If someone wants to make an Amish version of Ubuntu, she's entitled to do that, and more power to her. That is the real power of Ubuntu--it is free software, which you can modify and redistribute freely. If you cannot do that freely, you might as well be using Windows or Mac.

Trying to stop the creation of religious Linux distros is like trying to create a unified Linux distro. It won't happen, and it goes against the very principles of Linux and the GPL.

Stopping these distros from including the word Ubuntu in the name is possible, though, but it's up to Canonical, not you.

Edit: Mods maybe you should move this thread to the Backyard I've merged it with the other threads debating the value of Ubuntu religious derivatives, which were already in the Backyard.

[Stink Hook]

What about Yabadabaduuuuubuntu... it's so easy a caveman can do it.

[mhancoc7]

I just want to make clear I'm not against the CE or ME, I can understand why it could draw people to Ubuntu and why people find it handy, but I think they shouldn't be identified as separate editions. Maybe as packages.

I can understand this one. I will not try to start a debate about it since it has been discussed too much already. I just wanted you to know that I can see this point.

No I do not, as I explained it's the religious aspect that should be separated. I have used both variants. Just as people are/should be free to choose their own religion they should also be free to choose their own DE's. As you might see from on my avatar

I agree, but why is there a need for Kubuntu or Xubuntu when the DE's are just packages. Isn't that what you think Ubuntu CE should be, just a package?

I agree as far as naming goes (sorry, Jereme).

No worries. I appreciate that others have a different opinion. That is what keeps life interesting. I can even see your point. I just do not agree. :) I appreciate how well you make your points without pushing your opinions on anyone.

Thanks, Jereme

[Ebuntor]

I don't think it's ridiculous at all. If someone wants to make an Amish version of Ubuntu, she's entitled to do that, and more power to her. That is the real power of Ubuntu--it is free software, which you can modify and redistribute freely. If you cannot do that freely, you might as well be using Windows or Mac.

Trying to stop the creation of religious Linux distros is like trying to create a unified Linux distro. It won't happen, and it goes against the very principles of Linux and the GPL.


Oh no I agree about the creation of an Amish version any other such version. As I said in my previous post: everyone should be free to choose and such a version indeed has every right to exist. It's just that the name "Ubuntu" should not be included.

Should have explained it better.


Stopping these distros from including the word Ubuntu in the name is possible, though, but it's up to Canonical, not you.
Well I didn't say I was trying to stop them. I was only giving my opinion as mhancoc7 asked and my solution.

[aysiu]

No worries. I appreciate that others have a different opinion. That is what keeps life interesting. I can even see your point. I just do not agree. :) I appreciate how well you make your points without pushing your opinions on anyone. Sure. The naming thing, for me, actually has little to do with religion (though, obviously, religion is a hot topic here). I just think that having the word Ubuntu in a distro's name creates confusion as to its official/unofficial status. Many people who objected to Ubuntu CE at its inception were under the mistaken impression that it was a derivative that Canonical had not only approved but had actually produced.

On the one hand, I could see a desire to include the word Ubuntu, since it's giving credit where credit is due, but I think it ultimately makes things more confusing, and it would be better to have a totally unrelated name and then just have a prominently displayed explanation on the project's website that the derivative uses a Ubuntu base (just as Linux Mint does, just as Mepis does, just as Linspire will).

Again, my opinion, and I know you disagree with it.

[Ebuntor]

I agree, but why is there a need for Kubuntu or Xubuntu when the DE's are just packages. Isn't that what you think Ubuntu CE should be, just a package?


No the reason I think the CE should be package is because of the religious aspect. K/XUbuntu are indeed "just" package (pretty large and different ones) but those do not have anything to do with religion.
Apart from that there is the marketing aspect of having a KDE and Xfce variants but that's a different topic.

[aysiu]

No the reason I think the CE should be package is because of the religious aspect. K/XUbuntu are indeed "just" package (pretty large and different ones) but those do not have anything to do with religion.
Apart from that there is the marketing aspect of having a KDE and Xfce variants but that's a different topic.
This doesn't make logical sense.

So, because Ubuntu CE has to do with religion, it should be a metapackage instead of remastered live CD?

What about a remastered live CD precludes religion association? Why does that same logic not apply to metapackages?

[Ebuntor]

This doesn't make logical sense.

So, because Ubuntu CE has to do with religion, it should be a metapackage instead of remastered live CD?

What about a remastered live CD precludes religion association? Why does that same logic not apply to metapackages?

The package thing was just a/the only "solution" I could come up with while I was typing. Doesn't make any difference if it was on a cd or in what format whatsoever. I can't even remember using the word cd actually.

As i already mentioned my problem is about the name "Ubuntu" the CE, ME and SE editions are using. The promotion as an special version of Ubuntu, as religious alternative. If it was a package with special Christian software you could download in Synaptic or from the CE website or order a cd (or whatever method they're using to distribute it) without the word Ubuntu it would be different imo.

But I'm starting to repeat myself, I already explained my opinion in previous posts.

[aysiu]

The package thing was just a/the only "solution" I could come up with while I was typing. Doesn't make any difference if it was on a cd or in what format whatsoever. I can't even remember using the word cd actually.

As i already mentioned my problem is about the name "Ubuntu" the CE, ME and SE editions are using. The promotion as an special version of Ubuntu, as religious alternative. If it was a package with special Christian software you could download in Synaptic or from the CE website or order a cd (or whatever method they're using to distribute it) without the word Ubuntu it would be different imo.

But I'm starting to repeat myself, I already explained my opinion in previous posts.
Maybe I was confused by how you phrased it.

I can agree fully with this last post, though. The name associating Ubuntu Christian Edition is confusing.

I would have called it something like Agape or CrossLinux or BibleTux.

Your best course of action is to complain to the Ubuntu Trademarks department: trademarks@canonical.com

[RudolfMDLT]

no offence, but i don't see a point in this project of yours.

Christian users can simply install those programs after they install the whole Operating System.

But it's a hassle! Why not reconfigure a distro to look like it by default? Why spend HOURS downloading and installing and modding until it looks like a nice Christian, Hindo, Satanic or whatever distro. Or, why not just for the heck of it! Ubuntu Electrical Engineers edition preinstalled with an Algebra system and some circuit drawing tools? thats why we use Ubuntu - for the freedom!

[Ebuntor]

Maybe I was confused by how you phrased it.

I can agree fully with this last post, though. The name associating Ubuntu Christian Edition is confusing.

I would have called it something like Agape or CrossLinux or BibleTux.

Your best course of action is to complain to the Ubuntu Trademarks department: trademarks@canonical.com

lol, well thank you but this all started with mhancoc7 asking what the point is was trying to make. Was just sharing my thoughts that's all. :)
If I did contact Canonical about this and they agree it might anger the CE developers or something like that (and maybe make some people leave Ubuntu. Anyway I think it's better to just leave things as they are. :)

[aysiu]

Well, as far as I know, mhancoc7 is the CE developer. So, yes, you may anger him, but he seems a calm fellow to me. I've seen him go through worse and weather it pretty well...

[Ebuntor]

Well, as far as I know, mhancoc7 is the CE developer. So, yes, you may anger him, but he seems a calm fellow to me. I've seen him go through worse and weather it pretty well...

He's the only one? :o Oh ok, I was under the impression there was a whole team behind it.

[aysiu]

He's the only one? :o Oh ok, I was under the impression there was a whole team behind it.
Maybe there is a team now. I was under the impression that Jereme was the sole developer, though.

[doobit]

Maybe there is a team now. I was under the impression that Jereme was the sole developer, though.

He's been kind enough to credit bug reporters as part of the community of contributors.

[Genecks]

Yes, I know and I expected someone to feel this way. In my opinion there are many Christians who simply do not realize that there are Christian Linux programs. I feel like having a real Christian Linux distro available will only bring more users to Linux and to Ubuntu. That is just my opinion though.

God Bless, Jereme

I agree. WIndows has become too secular.

[handy]

I agree. WIndows has become too secular.

Too secular?

I would think that M$ is just like Canonical; in that they are both trying to appeal to the majority of people, expecting the user to add anything else that they need to the OS's. For M$ you usually pay, for Ubuntu & the like, you rarely pay. (Edit: - Money that is!)

So, does too secular mean that all OS's should be overtly associated with someone's version of God?

[blackspyder]

If a certain group (religious or not) wishes to make a derivative of any given Open Source OS I see no reason why they shouldn't. My grandmother would probably like Ubuntu CE (since she's worked with Unix before) and so would my church but I prefer Ubuntu Studio and Xubuntu since they fit my needs.


Just thinking of all the time it took me to uninstall all her religious software off of the computer she gave me (about 5 years ago, WIN98 SE) i can see why other Christians or other groups) would like to have an OS with that built in already.

Finally, I dont see anything wrong with including links to the different derivatives of an OS 's websites on the base OS's website. They still count as users of the Base OS dont they? and there is nothing wrong with including the derivatives packages in the repos for the same reason.

[handy]

If a certain group (religious or not) wishes to make a derivative of any given Open Source OS I see no reason why they shouldn't. My grandmother would probably like Ubuntu CE (since she's worked with Unix before) and so would my church but I prefer Ubuntu Studio and Xubuntu since they fit my needs.


Just thinking of all the time it took me to uninstall all her religious software off of the computer she gave me (about 5 years ago, WIN98 SE) i can see why other Christians or other groups) would like to have an OS with that built in already.

Finally, I dont see anything wrong with including links to the different derivatives of an OS 's websites on the base OS's website. They still count as users of the Base OS dont they? and there is nothing wrong with including the derivatives packages in the repos for the same reason.

Blackspyder: That's all what I would call common sense, & I agree with it completely.

[jimmygoon]

Well, is anyone working on a mormon edition yet? Apparently if I become mormon they can tell me where I go when I die. I'm so excited. I wonder if I have to give them money before they tell me the answer!

[handy]

Well, is anyone working on a mormon edition yet? Apparently if I become mormon they can tell me where I go when I die. I'm so excited. I wonder if I have to give them money before they tell me the answer!

The religion was invented in the US, so you probably do! :-)

[Pugwash]

If a certain group (religious or not) wishes to make a derivative of any given Open Source OS I see no reason why they shouldn't. My grandmother would probably like Ubuntu CE (since she's worked with Unix before) and so would my church but I prefer Ubuntu Studio and Xubuntu since they fit my needs.



Wow, your grandma must be really cool.

[init1]

I don't see the point of Xubuntu, Kubuntu, and Edubuntu either. After all, you can just install Ubuntu and add educational applications, right?
Yes, but the desktop environment is a major part of the system. It would take a very long time to install kde and then uninstall gnome.

[init1]

Personally, I think that any kind of split damages both sides. Each faction is left with less support than if they worked together.

[lazyart]

Please, no more of this. But it does beg the question:

Can you dual boot jubuntu and ubuntuME (http://www.ubuntume.com/)? Or will they clash?

Sorry... I just couldn't resist.

[louieb]

and make sure you have on clean underwear.

[littlephil56]

Join Jubuntu!
So there's a christian version of Ubuntu. And a muslim edition. So, nu? Why no jewish derivative?
http://emattison.googlepages.com/jubuntu.jpg
I'm not sure how to start an entire Ubuntu edition (I'm an Ubuntu newbie), but if you're interested, please feel free to respond. I can use all the help I can get.

Thanks,
Eric


What does religion have to do with an OS?.I'm just curious.

[LollYouSuckZor]

... Is this a joke.. Jewbuntu? Holy... O.O, Well.. At least it's free ;)

[lamalex]

... Is this a joke.. Jewbuntu? Holy... O.O, Well.. At least it's free ;)

man I had to hold myself back on this one. ahhh just having this text box open is so tempting. but i will not make any jew jokes. will not.

[rickycodie]

why do we need a religion oriented os? i think you can visit youporn.com on the christian and muslim version ubuntu, there's just more crosses and cresents.

[wormser]

Please, no more of this. But it does beg the question:

Can you dual boot jubuntu and ubuntuME (http://www.ubuntume.com/)? Or will they clash?

Sorry... I just couldn't resist.

Sorry you cannot. There will be a serious conflict over resources.

[DJ Wings]

Er... Jewbuntu already exists... "Linux for Jewish Beings"? Sound familiar?
sudo apt-get install zionism
(Don't look at me, I'm Jewish myself...)

[Cows]

Im not trying to offend anyone and I do believe in god. But I think that combining a religion with a OS is the stupidest idea i ever heard. Whether its Christian , Muslim , Jewish , or W/E. It's stupid. You don't see the priest, rabbi, or w/e you believe in preaching to use (NAME)buntu.

[handy]

Im not trying to offend anyone and I do believe in god. But I think that combining a religion with a OS is the stupidest idea i ever heard. Whether its Christian , Muslim , Jewish , or W/E. It's stupid. You don't see the priest, rabbi, or w/e you believe in preaching to use (NAME)buntu.

Every thought word & deed is seen as stupid by someone...

Whatever brings joy is worth doing!

[init1]

eric02138, are you part of the conspiracy? not that there is any conspiracy.
X-Eric-Conspiracy: There is no conspiracy

[Cows]

That is definitely true. That is also freedom :).

[julian67]

What does religion have to do with an OS?.I'm just curious.

If you have a need to control people's minds, dictate moral boundaries (as proxy for someone who doesn't exist), fear/hate/punish/ridicule/patronise/exclude people who don't accept your ideas, carefully and deliberately ignore overwhelming evidence which proves you wrong, ascribe meaning to random events and responsibility to invisible omnipotent entities......you need a really powerful OS, Windows just won't be up to it.

[aysiu]

The only controlling of other people's minds I see here is folks trying to stop other folks from using open source the way it's meant to be used.

[julian67]

The only controlling of other people's minds I see here is folks trying to stop other folks from using open source the way it's meant to be used.

You're right, every person has the right to use the GPL'd code and applications in any way they choose, and that's a vital and fundamental freedom. And I have the right and the freedom to say if I like what they do or not. If someone wants to build a religiously oriented/themed OS GNU Linux would seem to be the best way as it's based on sound rational principles and does not require any particular belief, superstition or ethnicity of its users. It works well with or without incense, incantations, covenants* or sacrifices.

*see Novell

[shen-an-doah]

You know, I'm somewhat surprised Microsft hasn't come out with religious variations of Windows. It'd be pretty easy for them to buy some programmes to add in and they could make a fair bit...

[Enverex]

This is the thing though, these AREN'T forks. These people don't understand this and think that if they modify the smallest thing it becomes a "fork" worthy of having it's own release and it's plain stupid. A few pre-installed packages does not a distro make!

Also, all those "pro" random-fork people, you don't have to deal with the aftermath of these hundreds of "sub-sub-sub" distros that aren't really distros at all. Promoting something just because you can is a dumb thing to do.

[visionaire]

i hear that /bin/ladden is the man behind UbuntuME lol

[Cheese Sandwich]

Becareful when installing jubuntu and ubuntume on the same hard disk, jubuntu will take over all partitions and greatly reduce the size of the ubuntume partition. Also, all internet activity in ubuntume would have to go through jubuntu.


:lol:

[mhancoc7]

This is the thing though, these AREN'T forks. These people don't understand this and think that if they modify the smallest thing it becomes a "fork" worthy of having it's own release and it's plain stupid. A few pre-installed packages does not a distro make!

Also, all those "pro" random-fork people, you don't have to deal with the aftermath of these hundreds of "sub-sub-sub" distros that aren't really distros at all. Promoting something just because you can is a dumb thing to do.

FYI:

Ubuntu CE FAQ (http://www.whatwouldjesusdownload.com/christianubuntu/2006/07/faq.html):

Q: Is Ubuntu Christian Edition a new distribution of Ubuntu or a derivative?

A: Well it is really neither. Ubuntu Christian Edition is based directly from the standard Ubuntu distribution and contains extra Christian software as well as a few additional tools to make the transition to Ubuntu easier for a Linux newcomer. The graphical changes are minor and are only intended to tailor the project to Christians.

Also, it is not very productive to call things "stupid" just because you do not agree. I am fine with you thinking that, but I do not take people seriously when the only way they can articulate their point is through such "name calling".

Jereme

[handy]

I agree, it is stupid to say stupid! :)

[Enverex]

FYI:

Ubuntu CE FAQ (http://www.whatwouldjesusdownload.com/christianubuntu/2006/07/faq.html):



Also, it is not very productive to call things "stupid" just because you do not agree. I am fine with you thinking that, but I do not take people seriously when the only way they can articulate their point is through such "name calling".

Jereme

The problem is people refer to it as one and I was referring to the storm of "distros" not CE in particular.

I agree, it is stupid to say stupid! :)

Baaa.

[mhancoc7]

The problem is people refer to it as one and I was referring to the storm of "distros" not CE in particular.

I understand that the seemingly endless new Ubuntu derivatives may be a bit excessive. I also understand that some may not agree with any fork or derivation of Ubuntu. I remember very well when the concept of a KDE Ubuntu was introduced. There where some really heated debates. Now Kubuntu is an accepted part of the Ubuntu community.

The only point I was trying to make is that each derivative, fork, or customized Ubuntu should be judged on its own merits.

Jereme

[Enverex]

I understand that the seemingly endless new Ubuntu derivatives may be a bit excessive. I also understand that some may not agree with any fork or derivation of Ubuntu. I remember very well when the concept of a KDE Ubuntu was introduced. There where some really heated debates. Now Kubuntu is an accepted part of the Ubuntu community.

The only point I was trying to make is that each derivative, fork, or customized Ubuntu should be judged on its own merits.

Jereme

Kubuntu to an extent makes sense because you can't fit both Gnome and KDE on a single CD, though it doesn't really need to be named a new distro, simply the download with the description "Ubuntu (With KDE)" would suffice.

[gusjones]

IMO mhancoc7 has done some pretty good work, and on merit this work is very much deserving of its 'fork' status. I think the activity on the Ubuntu CE section of the forum speaks for itself--even if you don't have Ubuntu CE specifically the support is there for all the packages that they maintain.

I would suggest Enverex that you are arguing over the semantics of Ubuntu CE & not its right to exist?

Keep up the good work mhancoc7 and don't get too discouraged. :D

[Tundro Walker]

The Jewish community hasn't made a Jubuntu, because they're smart. Why reinvent the wheel when someone's already giving away a free one that works just fine?

Ubuntu CE (Christian Edition), in my opinion, is not necessary. That's like making a Hammer CE, or Saw CE. Ubuntu is merely a tool that all sorts of folks can use. I don't see the need to make all these "editions" that merely come pre-loaded with certain packages. If you want that, then just make a small "Automatix" type script thing that lets the users quickly and easily load on the "Christian" or whatever stuff you'd like them to have.

EG:

Step 1) get Ubuntu
Step 2) install Ubuntu
Step 3) use my CE script to install the Christian stuff

I guess that's just too many steps for some.... I'm not trying to be a jerk here, but I'm just getting annoyed at all the versions of Ubuntu that keep coming out, and I'm not just picking on CE. Seriously, do we need an Ubuntu Studio Edition? It's loaded with some multimedia packages. Whoopee. Make a script and publish that. Let everyone start with vanilla X/K/Ubuntu, then use your script to tweak it to a different flavor.

I'm sure if I'm missing some special additional features that these involve, somebody will give me a flaming earful. LOL!

[aysiu]

If you get annoyed by "all the versions of Ubuntu that keep coming out," then use Mac or Windows or some other proprietary operating system. The whole point of open source is that anyone can take what's there, modify it and, by doing so, create her own version. You don't have to call it a "distro" or a "fork," if you think the modifications are too minor. What you call it is your choice. But the actual modification and rerelease is one of the main ideas behind open source--freedom, and the freedom to modify things to your needs.

If someone (in this case, mhancoc7 or Jereme) feels the need to modify Ubuntu for his needs, all he needs is the tools to do it (Reconstructor), the will to do it, and a target audience (which may be only himself). If no one (including himself) uses it, the project will die. If others find it valuable, who are you to say the project shouldn't exist?

And, finally, if you're such a fan of creating scripts instead of modifications to the live CD, then start complaining about the existence of Reconstructor instead of "all the versions of Ubuntu that keep coming out." If it weren't so darn easy to create new versions, I doubt as many would exist right now.

[Enverex]

Apparently you're not one of the people that has to deal with all the clueless people that think they need seperate categories for their wtfubuntu edition in everything that is made because it's "not the same as Ubuntu!!!" and thus you don't have to keep dealing with that crap and cleaning up the mess.

Yes I'm sour but most the people that preach how much of a great idea all these random forks are don't have to deal with any of the negative aspects of it.

[shen-an-doah]

Seriously, do we need an Ubuntu Studio Edition? It's loaded with some multimedia packages. Whoopee. Make a script and publish that.

It has a different Kernel to the standard Ubuntu as well, making it about as different from Ubuntu as K/Xubuntu...

[doobit]

Ubuntu CE (Christian Edition), in my opinion, is not necessary. That's like making a Hammer CE, or Saw CE. Ubuntu is merely a tool that all sorts of folks can use. I don't see the need to make all these "editions" that merely come pre-loaded with certain packages. If you want that, then just make a small "Automatix" type script thing that lets the users quickly and easily load on the "Christian" or whatever stuff you'd like them to have.


That script exists. The point of the "distro" is to have it already available on one disc to install for users that don't know enough about FOSS to do it themselves. What's wrong with that? You want people to actually use Linux and FOSS, or not?

[Gargamella]

I will never understand why you do a new distro instead of a ubuntu theme for this reason...

[aysiu]

Apparently you're not one of the people that has to deal with all the clueless people that think they need seperate categories for their wtfubuntu edition in everything that is made because it's "not the same as Ubuntu!!!" and thus you don't have to keep dealing with that crap and cleaning up the mess. So where do you hang out that you have to deal with those people and I don't? Just curious.

[Enverex]

It has a different Kernel to the standard Ubuntu as well, making it about as different from Ubuntu as K/Xubuntu...

Doesn't it just use the RT kernel? That's very little change, it's small and its just as easily doable with a script as any other package.

So where do you hang out that you have to deal with those people and I don't? Just curious.

Wine's AppDB mainly. People keep breaking things by adding new Ubuntu "distro's" repeatedly which we then have to manually merge (it does state on the list that the original Ubuntu includes it's variations but apparently that's not enough for most people, people should also realise that installing a backdrop picture of Jesus isn't going to affect Wine and doesn't need it's own category).

[shen-an-doah]

Doesn't it just use the RT kernel? That's very little change, it's small and its just as easily doable with a script as any other package.

As far as I know, it's the Ubuntu kernel modified to provide lower latency.

The point I was making is that something like the kernel or desktop environment changing makes it more fundamentally different than what packages are installed by default...

[mips]

Doesn't it just use the RT kernel? That's very little change, it's small and its just as easily doable with a script as any other package.


It's not a true RT kernel, more a low latency version.

[justin whitaker]

I call bullhockey.

If someone spends their time altering the code to suit their needs and throws up a web shingle for it, that's the whole point of open source. You have access to the code, and you can do pretty much anything you want with it.

If I want to create Tubuntu, a distribution for really smart toasters, then the only thing standing in my way is my development skills and my time.

Each and every distribution, even the weird personal projects, simply illustrates the beauty of open source as a development model.

One of the coolest things I have seen recently was Cl33n, a distibution that boots a PC, sets up an internet connection, and runs Firefox. That's it. Awesome idea, and that sort of thing sets off a torrent of other ideas. That sort of development does not happen in closed source, and the fact that one person saw the need and put it together shows that there was a need for it, even if the market size=1.

So apparently, the thing stopping people is the narrowmindedness of the Ubuntu community towards these new distributions. That is a shame, since I always found this to be the most open of the bunch.

The fact that Linux Mint, Ubuntu Studio, and all the others that are springing up exist is because someone saw the need, and decided to put in the time. Developing a niche distro is giving back something to open source, since it takes a significant amount of time and effort to pull off successfully.

UbuntuCE, ME, and Jubuntu (or whatever it is called) do more than just put a couple of new applications on Ubuntu: they extend Ubuntu into non-technical communities. How is that different from Edubuntu?

Doesn't really matter though: developers that want to create something can always use Fedora, OpenSUSE, Gentoo, PCLinuxOS, or 100 other distros as a base. Get the point? Arrogance breeds irrelevance in the open source world. There is tons of code available, and Ubuntu is not the only viable base.

Embrace the diaspora. Each one is an asset to the Ubuntu community.

[Enverex]

It's not a true RT kernel, more a low latency version.

I know, I was being vague, last I remembered it was named -rt or something though (although I think that's changed again).