Wheelerof4te wrote:Such as standard packaging solution for all Linux distributions (progress is being made, but as with every other endevour in Linux-land, this too has sparked division)
Please, no. We have a standard packaging system, it's called "make". The only people who really want a "standard" binary package are those who want to run proprietary non-free software.
Wheelerof4te wrote:I also don't understand the need for Linux to stay below 5% market share
I don't understand the need for Linux to get above 5% market share. In fact I don't see why we should care about "market share" at all, it's not like anyone gets paid per-installation.
You keep talking about this "market" thing, as if GNU/Linux was some commercial OS that had to attract sales. I don't get it.
Wheelerof4te wrote:Linux has to find a way to include people of all backgrounds
That's why we have many distros...
and to have proper documentation on most relevant issues.
"man" works for me. If you want to write some manpages, I'm all for that.
Wheelerof4te wrote:That's why I will always support an unification effort, an effort to bring Linux to the masses.
I don't care if "the masses" use Linux or not, but I'll fight any attempt to curtail the "divisive" diversity of GNU/Linux. Diversity is what got us this far.
If you get every distro using the same init, the same libc, the same UI, and the same package format, what's left to differentiate them? Different default colour schemes?
Shall we just have "One Linux"? Or should we produce a "Home" and "Pro" edition too? Yuck.
Wheelerof4te wrote:"Why would you waste so much effort just to fork something new, instead of making 1/100th of such effort just to learn to use and maintain it?" is the ultimate unanswered question.
The answer is the same as it has always been: "Because you don't like the direction it's headed in".
Wheelerof4te wrote:Linux is doing fine in the bussiness sector. Linux Desktop is not.
This is a problem? Why is this a problem?
Wheelerof4te wrote:Coming together will only make Linux stronger. None could ignore it. And more people will be interesed.
When they do get interesed, and they see something beautiful, modern and sleek, they will try it. Now, tell me, is that is bad for you? Or, will you then be able to enjoy more apps being native on Linux?
More non-free apps? No thanks.
More malware, adware and crapware? No thanks.
More uninformed users who have no idea how the systems work, and push for clicky buttons to do everything instead of learning? No thanks.
More commercial interest in GNU/Linux, and all the garbage that brings with it? No. Just No.
I like my chaotic bazaar, with it's cute, free, homebaked goods just how it is. The less the interference from big commercial software vendors the better.
Diversity keeps users and developers free to innovate, and to write and use software however they wish. "Standards" do the opposite.
If those standards are driven by commercial interests, it's not GNU /Linux any more.