On Friday, May 16, 2014 18:36:25 Rohan Garg wrote: > > Last time we discussed renaming, it was clear a name change would get us > > kicked out of the archive and we'd have to be a derivative, not an Ubuntu > > flavor. I'm not aware of any reason to think that's changed and looking > > at the Mint situation re licensing something we'd really like to avoid. > > I think that should be re-evaluated / discussed with the relevant > councils as and when > we decide to ship Plasma Next and KF 5 as the default ISO.
The relevant decider is sabdfl. I don't know of any reason to think he's changed his mind. > > Even if that weren't an issue, I'm against rebranding. It doesn't matter > > what we call it, as long as we're part of the Ubuntu project, we'll get > > some of whatever weirdness Canonical does to the Ubuntu desktop stuck on > > us. > > > > The brand is well established and unlike 4 or 5 years ago, seems to be a > > pretty good one. Rebranding seems to me like a great was to vanish into > > irrelevance. > > I'm not saying that we should immediately dissolve the Kubuntu brand, > instead, create > a new brand around Frameworks and PW2 by delivering a ISO not called > Kubuntu. This also > has the added benefit of not demolishing the Kubuntu brand to what we > had 4-5 years back *if* there > are grave bugs in Plasma Next. Once we come out with Awesome OS, we > just keep iterating and improving > Awesome OS to the same quality as Kubuntu, and then it should be a > simple switch out of replacing > Kubuntu with Awesome OS. I don't think that avoids the sabdfl problem and ultimately dilutes our brand. I think that providing an option (carefully caveatted) for people to install Plasma Next (or whatever it is) is the right way to go about it. Scott K -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kubuntu-council Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kubuntu-council More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
