Move KXStudio to ArchLinux?

[wolftune]

I voted YES, but please consider my vote with serious qualifications.

Here's my position: leave Ubuntu because of the problems with being closed and unresponsive and whatever else. I have complaints about their opt-out spy-ad/ware and other things. I also like a lot of what they are doing and don't hate Unity. I like the idea of the HUD. I like the idea of making any Linux more successful, point is that this is complex.

So: given that you have additional technical complaints as a dev, I think it is best if you reject Ubuntu. You will be happiest when you don't feel like you are fighting all the time. But, it is true there's lots of Ubuntu-based stuff, I dunno…

I will follow KXStudio wherever it goes, as long as it is still focused on being fully newbie-friendly, including being an all-around platform people can functionally use for their overall computing. Some people may not go with you, but in other ways, you have power to get people to choose different distros because someone like me cares about KXStudio more thhan about the base distro.

Now, Arch? Dunno, never used it. Heard some good things. Sounds like there's lots of people here really pushing for Mageia! It sounds great to me, maybe more stable and user-friendly than Arch. I urge you not to decide on going with Arch before you have really considered whether something like Mageia may be a better option. And there's also ROSA which has always looked appealing to me, and the fact that it is Mandriva-based also means maybe a Mageia-focused KXStudio could also make use of ROSA elements. Otherwise, if you like Arch, consider Chakra; they seem like one of the best, great looking, newbie-friendly I think, and very promising. Chakra is surely in the Ubuntu direction of being really user-focused, even beating Ubuntu in many ways for nice GUI installing and other features.

Put it this way: if KXStudio didn't exist, I would be considering these other distros over Ubuntu, probably I would not go with Arch directly myself. I might actually stick with Ubuntu-based systems, but I dunno.

All this said, Debian shouldn't be ruled out. I would happily follow KXStudio to Debian. Philosophically, that might be my first choice. Debian represents my priorities pretty well. If KXStudio did the work of keeping things up to date enough, then it could work. But if it puts too much burden on KXStudio, well, I dunno. I don't have enough expertise to judge. But I know many people who have stuck to Debian.

I trust you to make the right decision, but probably studying these options I mentioned here is necessary before you act. If you stick to Ubuntu, focusing on just LTS releases isn't crazy, well, at least until you get more funding… that's another topic.

[skavar]

I will vote no for moving to Arch. Although this will not effect me too much, as I have had quite a bit of experience with Arch (which I ditched for debian SID when they went a bit funny about the AMD binary blob), I cannot see my musician daughter ever being happy using it. I managed to convince her to move from AVLinux, due to its end of life, to KXStudio with XFCE , and we are both very comfortable with this set-up on our computers.

She has recorded her band, and other groups and soloists with this set-up and has impressed these people with the ease and quality that KXStudio allows, and some are converts. The fact that KXStudio is also her normal daily 'distro' is a big plus.

If you are wanting to move to a more up to date rolling distro then I would be glad to see you adopt Debian testing, perhaps via Siduction repositories or some such. As for PPA's, is it not possible to have a repository such as the debian multimedia team do.

I know nothing of Mageia but it does sound interesting.

Cheers,
skavar

[stanlea]

There are 2 questions in one

1 Leave Ubuntu ? I'd say yes, because it's moving to an average monopolistic os, with real inconveniences for music production.

2 Move to arch ? I'd say no, because you'll have in fact to fork Arch if you want to have an user friendly use and installation process - people from Arch doesn't support forks - and moreover, we'll have much more issues with Arch than with Ubuntu

So, it's tricky...

[funkmuscle]

why can't this be on both distros? I'm an Archer for years now.. every once in a while I'd in install Ubuntu or Mint or Fedora on my extra box and still none matches Arch.. I don't know why everyone has issues with the devs or forum. I get help instantly.

NOT PUTTING DOWN THE OTHER DISTROS HERE BUT, problems with Arch?? I need to keep producing beats for this hip hop artist so I need the OS running always and Arch was the most stable for me in that respect.. Remember, Arch gives you the choice to build a minimal system. That was something I couldn't do with the popular distros.

Bottom line again, not comparing, just standing up for what I like as it's been bashed on here but YEAH, WHY NOT ON BOTH?

[Capoeira]

Systemd was a big pain for many others too, killing a lot of systems. I managed to avoid it by holding off updating for as long as I possibly could so I could understand exactly how the shift would impact my systems.

though I must say it was some work for the user; if someone broked his system it's because he didn't read the newsletter/wiki.
PLUS: something like this won't happen every year. The efford to maintain an Arch-system is less than a UPTODATE Ubuntu (this after you learned Arch). Reintalling twice a year is much more work than changing some configs from time to time.


-----


As mentioned, there are allready some GUI-installers form other projects he could use.
So, if he would manage to script those nesccesary changes in configs from time to time, I don't see why a newbie couldn't use KXStudio based on Arch

[funkmuscle]

been wait for you Cap..

like I asked, instead of bashing distos, why can't it be for both?

[funkmuscle]

there, problem solved.!! thanx falk

[autostatic]

Nobody is bashing distros here.

[funkmuscle]

felt like it a bit Jeremy.. Just a lot of negative on Arch.. I know where everyone was and is coming from but the question was Move KXStudio to Arch and then the negative started.. I just asked why not both and falk answered.. For us Archers, we say yes and for the Ubuntu users, you already have it.. Happy now in both worlds..

[wolftune]

I guess aside from just having mentioned it, how does it work with the relation between Arch and Chakra? Because it seems ideal to me to make the KXStudio ISO based on Chakra if going that direction (whereas I see arguments for Mageia and also for staying Ubuntu-based, but setting those aside for a moment…). Would it work, is it easy for KXStudio to support both Arch and Chakra and related distros? Because I have the strong sense that Chakra is more newbie-friendly and maybe even all-around better, but it is based on Arch, except I think it is forked rather than being always connected, so maybe more divorced than the Mint/Ubuntu relationship.

[funkmuscle]

Chakra is very friendly.. KXStudio I thought was a pro multi-media environment and not a distro so making it available for everyone's ditro should be cool?!?!
Kinda like Gnome or KDE as yes, they are DEs but isn't that where KXStudio is coming from?

[gingerling]

Yes, becuase I want to be free, and canonical feels like a backwards step...

thats said, I really reaallly depend on kxstudio to be my solution to all things video editing. Its nice and stable for me, where nothing else has been. I would be streessed out if a ton of stuff broke... more stressed than am with canonical? Who knows.... maybe!

I put my trust in your technical skills!

A
x

[Capoeira]

Also CHakra is KDE.....so this might be the real (pacman based) alternative

[raboof]

The efford to maintain an Arch-system is less than a UPTODATE Ubuntu (this after you learned Arch). Reintalling twice a year is much more work than changing some configs from time to time.

You seem to be under the impression you need to reinstall Ubuntu twice a year. That's not the case: you can upgrade from one release to another.

[funkmuscle]

The efford to maintain an Arch-system is less than a UPTODATE Ubuntu (this after you learned Arch). Reintalling twice a year is much more work than changing some configs from time to time.

You seem to be under the impression you need to reinstall Ubuntu twice a year. That's not the case: you can upgrade from one release to another.

I think Cap meant Unubtu is not a rolling release 'yet' as there are rumours of it going that way..