Re: SEUL: The outline of an end-user distro

[Dennis Leeuw <adl@casema.net>]

> > I think we have two different kinds of end-users. First there is the
> > home-user and second we have the office-user. Both are two differnt
> > types, with different wishes. To name a simple difference: the home-user
> > expects a simple PPP configuration, while the office-user wants a simple
> > network connection.
>
> I think you're missing quite a bit of differentiation here.  There
> aren't just home- and office-users; there are also school-users,
> artist-users, scientific-users, etc.  To keep things manageable, you may
> want to define two generic configurations--occasional-net-connect and
> permanent-net-connect.  Then you could have further "profiles" for the
> various uses.

I think you have to set the basic distro more generic. The plain (preferably
1 CD set) is just your basic stuff. Linux, kernel, X-server, window manager,
desktop environment.

Next to that you could build several CDs, and have the user pick the one
he/she likes, that provides the programs they like.
Personally I think it is good to have a setup like Microsoft, aren't they a
wonderful example? :). Ship a basic OS, provide an aditional CD-set with your
basic office stuff, and build a collection of CDs with additional programs.

If you want to build something like a distro for educational purposes, do you
split it up into, elementary school, high-school, university. I don't know
how it is in other parts of the world, but here in Holland we have hundreds
of different schools, who don't want the same basic stuff.

Currently my main concern is the basic OS. And that is why I spilt the
end-user group into two parts. PPP-users (or non-internet users), and
networked users. The reason why I choose this is that there is a main
difference in what they need from a basic os. As soon as you start networking
you need solutions for Novell, Macintosh, maybe even DEC (I know they are
working on it).

That is my point. The additional programs are of no concern to me right now.
When we do have a common platform, it shouldn't be to hard to collect the
programs and compile them.

Or do I still the point?


> On the seul-edu mailing list we toyed with the idea of a distro for the
> educational community, but decided that it made more sense to package a
> bouquet of useful programs as a profile that could be used with whatever
> distro the user chose.  That way we didn't have to be concerned with
> lots of non-educational things that many other groups were already
> working out.

I think that is a nice solution, but wouldn't it be nice to have a distro on
which you could depend. One you know for sure it would work on. That's my
point. There should first be a common end-user distro.


> > A more healthy discussion on this point to me is the following: Since we
> > seem to agree on GPL, and non-commercial, how do we feel e.g. QT from
> > Troll and the KDE desktop?
> >
> All of our seul-edu-developed programs will be GPLed, but I personally
> think the qt license is close enough to OSS to be of little concern.  I
> still think that GNOME has more long-term potential, though.  Actually,
> I lean toward GNUstep over either of them, myself.

That is my feeling too. I think GNOME is probably the long-term surviver, but
currently, and don't start a flame war right now, KDE is more mature. On the
otherhand I am using Window Maker for some time now and am happy. Next to the
fact that GNUstep apps might (in the future) be compatible with Apple OS X
apps, that would bring a lot of programs to the Linux desktop. So if the boys
and girls of GNUstep do manage to complete a workspace in the near future I
think that would be the best solution.
But that is all technicality. I keep doing that, dive into the technical
stuff :) I think we have to look at the perspective of the end-user. He wants
a working system. No hassle, and no migrating problems. That means we have to
be prepared for the future. So I don't think we should settle for just one
outlook right now, although that would be ideal.

Dennis