kubuntu-council team mailing list archive

[Scott Kitterman <ubuntu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

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