Hi,
just fixing some typos here...
On Tuesday 16 September 2008 15:34, Holger Levsen wrote:
> 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
the
> 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
shouldn't
> 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:
pgpF0gx8_AOtC.pgp
Description: PGP signature