By the way , Chrome fits in like it's native and is running hella fast on
this DE on my test box. I'm about to crank the ram down and see how low I
can get.

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Andrew Woodhead <> wrote:

> This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard
> repos can be used to install apps if they are needed.
> If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a
> minimal install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed
> off the repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland
> efficient distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating the
> system with the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are fully
> installable once the installation has completed but the initial base system
> should be slick and quick
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby <>wrote:
>> On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote:
>> <discussion of "keep it light" or "feature complete" elided>
>> Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between
>> "ease of use/fully featured" on the one hand and lightweight on the
>> other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to
>> build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest.
>> I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the
>> list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks
>> where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the
>> possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering
>> "bundles" to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the
>> FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind.
>> The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable
>> system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the
>> real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or
>> grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to
>> install.
>> More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have
>> yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of
>> bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system
>> performance vs features. It should be organized so that a savvy user
>> could bypass the explanations (or load a jumpstart script), but a novice
>> would get a detailed explanation of what the choices are and what they
>> mean for the final installed system.
>> My $0.02.
>> Cheers
>> C David Rigby
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: 
>> Post to     :
>> Unsubscribe : 
>> More help   :
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: 
> Post to     :
> Unsubscribe : 
> More help   :
Mailing list:
Post to     :
Unsubscribe :
More help   :

Reply via email to