4 ms·

Has the distribution model been good for Linux? It led to different approaches to things like desktop environments, packaging, and a variety of platforms, but 3

Has the distribution model been good for Linux? It led to different approaches to things like desktop environments, packaging, and a variety of platforms, but 30+ years later, there are several sane choices for server distros, desktop distros are even more fragmented, and the most popular user distros are Android and ChromeOS.

EGG_CREAM 1y ago
I think so, because the users seem to like having different options. For commercial software, it makes sense to count how many devices use a particular distribution as the measure of “success”, but for projects like most Linux distributions , I don’t know that number of users makes sense. Why should we care how many users a particular distribution has, when almost all of them aren’t paying or contributing? Having more users doesn’t make the software any better inherently, and nobody is making money from those users. Instead, I would argue that user enthusiasm and dev interest are better measures of success for open source projects like this, and arch, Debian, Linux mint, etc are all doing fine in those regards.
michaelmrose 1y ago
It is tempting to consider the replacement for a lively evolving market of good options is just the best option only better for all the labor focused on a singular end but in fact the likely result of a singular option is most of that labor that literally only exists because of the interest in doing ones own thing just ceases to exists and is lost. What persists never had the privilege of benefiting from ideas taken from all those other now non-existent projects and is on the whole mediocre.
kmacleod 1y ago
The packaging model of distribution is ubiquitous. Every distribution does the same thing just using different control files and tools. The differentiation between distributions is all in their packaging policies and platform decisions. In a loose way Unix (SysV, HP, AIX) started packaging before Linux but Linux said "Every project is its own package" and ran with it. The de-facto "Download release; apply patches; configure; make; make install; collect files" is present in every distribution package. Everything up through deployment is the same pattern across all distributions.
NikkiA 1y ago
The amount of software available for linux vs the BSDs tells me that the distro model has not hurt linux. If a homogenous software stack from a single centralised set of software was beneficial, it would be more likely that porting to linux from a BSD codebase would be the norm, rather than the other way around.

EGG_CREAM 1y ago

I think so, because the users seem to like having different options. For commercial software, it makes sense to count how many devices use a particular distribution as the measure of “success”, but for projects like most Linux distributions , I don’t know that number of users makes sense. Why should we care how many users a particular distribution has, when almost all of them aren’t paying or contributing? Having more users doesn’t make the software any better inherently, and nobody is making money from those users. Instead, I would argue that user enthusiasm and dev interest are better measures of success for open source projects like this, and arch, Debian, Linux mint, etc are all doing fine in those regards.

michaelmrose 1y ago

It is tempting to consider the replacement for a lively evolving market of good options is just the best option only better for all the labor focused on a singular end but in fact the likely result of a singular option is most of that labor that literally only exists because of the interest in doing ones own thing just ceases to exists and is lost. What persists never had the privilege of benefiting from ideas taken from all those other now non-existent projects and is on the whole mediocre.

kmacleod 1y ago

The packaging model of distribution is ubiquitous. Every distribution does the same thing just using different control files and tools. The differentiation between distributions is all in their packaging policies and platform decisions. In a loose way Unix (SysV, HP, AIX) started packaging before Linux but Linux said "Every project is its own package" and ran with it. The de-facto "Download release; apply patches; configure; make; make install; collect files" is present in every distribution package. Everything up through deployment is the same pattern across all distributions.

NikkiA 1y ago

The amount of software available for linux vs the BSDs tells me that the distro model has not hurt linux. If a homogenous software stack from a single centralised set of software was beneficial, it would be more likely that porting to linux from a BSD codebase would be the norm, rather than the other way around.