In my recent wave of thinking about Kubuntu and how to make it clearer what
exactly we are doing, I came to wonder why Kubuntu actually exists.
Now, let me explain what I mean by that. Every project (every useful one
anyway) is there to solve some problem or improve something, simply put a
general justification for spending time on it. Kubuntu, being a useful project,
must have some general justificaiton of existance, some problem, desire or
What I'd like to find out is exactly what Kubuntu is supposed to archive, and
why other OS or distributions failed at it. Not so much by how we want to
archive it or by what means we (want to) measure the successfulness of this.
If everyone writes a couple of lines (some would call this brainstorming
it might be easier to find a general definition as to why Kubuntu is existing
and why it is good that it is existing.
From the get go, I thought of Kubuntu as yet another article of evidence that proves Linux is unlimited.* My, like so many others, first impression of Ubuntu was that it was very user friendly, solid and it just worked so well... but only if I could run my preferred desktop environment!
There's always a way in Linux so as long as you have the will.* Mark Shuttleworth wanted to make the best desktop distro out there and according to the polls I read he has (30% of 2007-2008 Linux installs).* He also named it Ubuntu which is an apt title because Linux it's self is a very humane project to begin with.
Kubuntu just goes to show that Linux is unstoppable.* The Ubunutu idea was built upon and KDE used... because why not?* People wanted it... and the name Kubuntu is very apt also because it is another example of the long history of abbreviation/acronym/word play in the open source community.
I've herd rumors that KDE might become the standard desktop environment in Ubuntu.* Anyone else know anything about that?*
(PS, Ex is my real last name)
kubuntu-devel mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel