Raphael Hertzog wrote:
I very much agree. I never had a problem with the fact that Canonical is willing to capitalize improvements to Debian. I never cared for their "de-branding" of Debian's work and creating negative press for the project. True or not, Ubuntu entered the marketplace with the message of "we're going to fix Debian because its broken" and changed Debian branding throughout the project to their own. I'm sure that no one at Canonical intentionally set out to make Debianers angry but it wasn't an ideal way to start the relationship.Indeed, that's why it's great that Ubuntu is ready to make it more obvious that they are Debian based.
The Ubuntu site says that ubuntu means "I am what I am because of who we all are". If Ubuntu is ready to live up that slogan and publicly acknowledge that it is what it is *because* of its Debian origins, rather than despite them, then I think that is great.
There is something to be said for having a Debian brand that means "you can install Debian-stable packages on this distribution and they will work". The testing process for something like that would be interesting. It could be regarded more as a strategic committment on the part of the distribution to achieve that goal.I find this overkill and the kind of administrative work that we shouldn't have to do. The DFSG authorizes any derived work, there's no reason for us to create a difference "good/bad derived work".