PDA

View Full Version : ubuntu should move out of debian



elliotn
December 29th, 2010, 03:55 PM
I think ubuntu has group over the years and should slowly move out of being a modified version of debian and become a standalone distro, I believe unity is a great start as ubuntu. ubuntu should have its own programs that builds the core of the system.

forrestcupp
December 29th, 2010, 04:05 PM
Why reinvent the wheel if you don't really need to?

Evil-Ernie
December 29th, 2010, 04:56 PM
Debian has served well just has Gnome but I feel Ubuntu does need to push forward and take risks, no rest on its laurels.

I know Unity is a moot point in the community and rightly so, love it or hate it I think its shows a thirst for development and a desire to make things better. Whether or not it does we will see, but dont forget you can choose to use Gnome still if you want.

Maybe at the moment shifting out of Debian is a step to far but its something to consider for the future.

NightwishFan
December 29th, 2010, 05:13 PM
Not that Debian rides on Ubuntu's coattails far from it; However I would like the see a continued close relationship between the projects, as I like both of them a lot.

MadCow108
December 29th, 2010, 05:20 PM
what would ubuntu gain from this?
who would maintain the ~25.000 directly imported debian packages?
ubuntu is nothing without debian

unless you mean changing to rpm based distro base like red hat, but again: what would be the advantage?
if you don't like debian based distributions, use a different one. there are plenty out there.

kgarbutt
December 29th, 2010, 05:25 PM
Ubuntu needs Debian. They both need each other. Ubuntu should stay with with them. And as for Unity, it is a step in the wrong direction.

Evil-Ernie
December 29th, 2010, 05:28 PM
And as for Unity, it is a step in the wrong direction.

Why do you think that?

NightwishFan
December 29th, 2010, 05:33 PM
Ubuntu needs Debian. They both need each other. Ubuntu should stay with with them. And as for Unity, it is a step in the wrong direction.

You offer no reasoning for this.
This thread is not about unity.
Trolling about how it is "bad move" or a "step in the wrong direction" (as you so eloquently put it) will not stop Unity from launching in 11.04. The only thing that will is if it fails to offer the user experience or code stability (as in ability to stay usable with only minor bug fixes in the whole natty lifetime) that Canonical deems appropriate for the release.
I am willing to bet Unity will rock, and am looking forward to trying it when Natty launches this April.


Edit: I agree about Debian though. :)

gradinaruvasile
December 29th, 2010, 05:50 PM
I am curious how could the Ubuntu devs maintain all the packages that in fact are imported from debian (some debian devs are ubuntu devs too, but the reverse does not apply as far as i know).
These packages (around 30000 now in the debian repos) are maintained by debian and each new ubuntu version begins in fact with a copy of debians testing (until 9.10 was unstable) repos (mind you , those packages are maintained and debugged by debian until that point). So ubuntu does not "reinvent the wheel" because it has debian to do the heavy lifting.

BTW i stopped using ubuntu from version 9.10 because i hated the interface changes, the buggy 6-month releases and the lack of updated packages in th repos (i hate installing ppas and work around broken dependencies). Now i use debian and most packages you have in the ubuntu repos+its ppas you can find in the main debian repos.

I dont know about how unity will behave, but surely will have bugs - this is normal because it is a new interface and it is not tested thoroughly yet. The problem is that ubuntus devs knowingly intruduce buggy packages of high usability impact areas (sound, ui) in (so-called) stable releases. They should name these testing releases and warn people about it.

Evil-Ernie
December 29th, 2010, 06:06 PM
(some debian devs are ubuntu devs too, but the reverse does not apply as far as i know).


Bit confused what you mean here?



I dont know about how unity will behave, but surely will have bugs - this is normal because it is a new interface and it is not tested thoroughly yet. The problem is that ubuntus devs knowingly intruduce buggy packages of high usability impact areas (sound, ui) in (so-called) stable releases. They should name these testing releases and warn people about it.

I agree new releases will always be more buggy that older releases, that is just the nature of the game. Im sorry any dev will know there is a good chance of problems and niggles when you introduce something new no matter how much UAT is done, this is true of other distros including commercial software. Its how issues are fixed thats the difference, thats why bug reports and beta testing is so important to the health of Ubuntu.

NightwishFan
December 29th, 2010, 06:09 PM
It is the nature of software that fixing one bug will likely create ten more. Someone made an excellent "bottles of beer on the wall" song about it. :)

If you step beyond a simple hello world, expect breakage.

elliotn
December 29th, 2010, 06:57 PM
with canonical's backing ubuntu can stand on its own

I think

Zzl1xndd
December 29th, 2010, 07:07 PM
with canonical's backing ubuntu can stand on its own

I think

Perhaps but what advantage would it provided? There are a lot of down sides as other have mentioned, But I don't see what would be gained from this move?

ErikNJ
December 29th, 2010, 07:55 PM
It's worth noting that all of the software that makes up a typical distro is not developed entirely by any distro. Different developer with different distributions work way upstream on projects that will be packaged or incorporated by a distribution. For example, could anyone name one distribution that is soley responsible for GCC, or python, or lib-whatever?

My point is that ALL distributions are products of the collaborative effort of the whole open-source community. The primary differences between distributions lie in who packages the upstream programs and integrates those programs into a specific distribution (like Fedora may now use python2.7 while Ubuntu uses python2.6).

So, if Ubuntu were to step away from Debian, it would mean the Ubuntu community would have to work directly with the upstream software that makes up Ubuntu. It would also mean moving to a different package format (or just duplicate Debians efforts).

A better suggestion (one already made by Mark Shuttleworth), would be to make it easier to obtain newer versions of the software included in Ubuntu and its repositories. A desktop for personal use can easily get away with grabbing software that is closer to the latest and greatest with little risk.

As far as Unity, it is a SHELL that resides atop Gnome - it is not a Gnome replacement. It really is an optional enhancement for the Gnome desktop. Unity by itself is not an entire desktop. For that matter, Gnome-shell is not an entire desktop either. You are required to use Unity as much as you are required to use Compiz Fusion (like that desktop cube everybody likes).

madjr
December 29th, 2010, 09:07 PM
.ubu instead of .deb?

MisterGaribaldi
December 29th, 2010, 09:12 PM
what would ubuntu gain from this?
who would maintain the ~25.000 directly imported debian packages?
ubuntu is nothing without debian

unless you mean changing to rpm based distro base like red hat, but again: what would be the advantage?
if you don't like debian based distributions, use a different one. there are plenty out there.
There's far more than 25 packages for Ubuntu. :lolflag:

But otherwise, I agree with you; I'd rather have Debian packages.

kaldor
December 29th, 2010, 09:22 PM
Why do you think that?

Because it's change, of course; change is The Devil.

elliotn
December 30th, 2010, 03:58 AM
.ubu instead of .deb?

+1 to that.

stmiller
December 30th, 2010, 04:05 AM
There's far more than 25 packages for Ubuntu. :lolflag:



In the rest of the world (non-USA) a period (dot) is used instead of a comma for example to indicate thousands.

30.000 = 30,000

MisterGaribaldi
December 30th, 2010, 04:16 AM
In the rest of the world (non-USA) a period (dot) is used instead of a comma for example to indicate thousands.

30.000 = 30,000

That's weird. How could one tell, then, if an actual decimal was intended?

Hur Dur
December 30th, 2010, 04:17 AM
Ubuntu should use the DOS kernel. Just sayin'

stmiller
December 30th, 2010, 04:40 AM
That's weird. How could one tell, then, if an actual decimal was intended?

For that, use a comma. :)

http://www.ebay.de

http://www.amazon.de/

Cheers,

Khakilang
December 30th, 2010, 04:53 AM
Why is it relevant? Is it because of identity? Ubuntu need its own identity instead of Debian base? Do they need to create their own software package, their own desktop manager and their own file manager? Although it is Debian base but there is a different in terms of users experience.