[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
1) Indy should be a distribution whose PRIMARY goal is spreading Linux
and helping users. One where developers feel strongly about people
who suffer the crashes and abusive licenses of other systems. One
where making Indy easier and more useful would be more important than
in making it a well chiseled cathedral for developer's pride. I know of
someone who in 1992 or 1993 traveled Paris-Brussels just for
carrying one of the first Linux copies to reach Belgium. It is in that
spirit Indy should be made.
2) Indy should be a distrib where developers feel as "users in action"
trying to help other users instead of as persons who are different
(and superior) from users. Basically a spirit like "I had this
problem I don't want other people having it".
3) Indy should aim at desktop and home users because these are the
most neglected in present distributions and because these are crucial
for getting Linux in wide use. No matter how easy to install and
configure is Linux most people will not use it if it does not allows
them to manage their checkbooks, play movies, fill their tax
declaration, help their kids at school, know the weather forecasts.
But slapping software until we fill 50 CDs is not enough: every
distribution includes the Gimp but how many speak of it in the doc?
how many ship the Gimp user manual so the user can really get the most
of it? how many care about shipping some additional textures or
plug-ins? It is that who makes the difference between a distribution
who includes the Gimp because of the bad PR in case they didn't and
one who really aims at Linux being used for graphical work and not
only as a boring Samba server. And that is what Indy should do, not
only for the Gimp, but for every piece of desktop software included in
it: ensuring the user gets the most of it so he does not have to
reboot to Windows in order to get some work done. Of course final
goal is user being weaned of Windows. ;-)