Hi, it occured to me yesterday, that I think that this topic is still open and that the cause might be very simple: the reason why a new name doesnt catch up (IMHO it doesnt) is that it's confusing/not needed/immediatly clear why it's needed. AIUI we want to name a variant of Debian, right? So, no modified/additional sources or binaries? (Just a different presentation...) IMO that _is_ Debian. So there is no need for a new name ;-) Surely, to be able to point out the difference, some name needs to be found. But I (now) think, the name should be some "random" three letter acronym, but something that clearly emphasizes it's Debian. Maybe "Debian Remix" or "Debian (Pure) Blend". Also I think it should be something short, "Debian Integrated Solutions" IMO not only has the disadvantage that some remixes aint solutions, but also that nobody will use it and so we will have to explain DIS again. A name should speak for itself. Or am I the only one unhappy with DIS? regards, Holger
Attachment:
pgpwTnk5b_stO.pgp
Description: PGP signature