Why isn't Mint an official Ubuntu derivative?

[RETNUH]

I'm just wondering why Mint isn't listed as an official Ubuntu based distro.

[lmintnewb]

The following on distrowatch, listed under distro's based on buntu.

37. Linux Mint
Linux Mint is an Ubuntu-based distribution whose goal is to provide a more complete out-of-the-box experience by including browser plugins, media codecs, support for DVD playback, Java and other components. It also adds a custom desktop and menus, several unique configuration tools, and a web-based package installation interface. Linux Mint is compatible with Ubuntu software repositories.

Then when we check under distro's based on Debian we find.

73. Linux Mint
Linux Mint is an Ubuntu-based distribution whose goal is to provide a more complete out-of-the-box experience by including browser plugins, media codecs, support for DVD playback, Java and other components. It also adds a custom desktop and menus, several unique configuration tools, and a web-based package installation interface. Linux Mint is compatible with Ubuntu software repositories.

AND

120. Ubuntu
Ubuntu is a complete desktop Linux operating system, freely available with both community and professional support. The Ubuntu community is built on the ideas enshrined in the Ubuntu Manifesto: that software should be available free of charge, that software tools should be usable by people in their local language and despite any disabilities, and that people should have the freedom to customise and alter their software in whatever way they see fit. "Ubuntu" is an ancient African word, meaning "humanity to others". The Ubuntu distribution brings the spirit of Ubuntu to the software world.

Which obviously now ... LM is based both on Debian proper and buntu. Though it was listed that way ( both under Debian and buntu ) long before LM even started making Debian based releases. Which again ... mostly worthless for folks to think about overall ... imo anyway. Probably doesn't much matter to the avg end user which piece of what was originally developed by who. But point of fact ... my understanding is the vast majority of ubuntu is unchanged Debian code, just rebranded. If you look at all the distro's listed as being "based" on ubuntu. You'll find all the same ones listed as being based on Debian.

Think you're getting into murky and pointless waters for the most part. Not to mention must be relying on not so reliable sources of info for your gnu/nix outlooks. As LM is very much officially listed as a derivative of buntu ... Then again ... nothing wrong with thinking, being curious about stuff ... My bad, tend to waste a tad of time investigating x, y and z too. When I should definitely be devoting the time to more relevant stuff ... And come to think of it, by the apparent standards and rules of da game, Linux Mint is well into being a full fledged distro in its own right me thinks. No matter what they might base LM on. However someone wants to look at things I guess.

PS again ! Which also am not saying gnu/Linux and opensource is pointless. Think its awesome and am grateful to all the folks who devote their time, talent and energy on it. Just meant ... sometimes wish I'd spent time investigating this n that, looking into other stuff instead. Oh well ...

[AlbertP]

Mint isn't an official derivative, just because Ubuntu haven't named us official.

[truexfan81]

Mint isn't an official derivative, just because Ubuntu haven't named us official.

We should petition them to make it official!

[AlbertP]

Mint does not need to be bound to Ubuntu. Being an official Ubuntu release would restrict the freedom which the Mint team has.
It also has to be clear that Mint isn't yet another Ubuntu version. Mint is a seperate distro with its own philisophy.

[TheShadowFog]

Mint is a seperate distro with its own philisophy.

This.

[truexfan81]

I can honestly say i have never tried ubuntu, i'm been using mint on my netbook since mint 8, 6months ago mint 9 x64 became the primary OS on my pc when i got tired of the weekly problems with xp

[lmintnewb]

lol ... oh, you mean why isn't LM officially under the umbrella of the people at canonical ? Looking at things from that angle then, guess other posters pointed out why. Agree with them, obviously LM isn't one of canonicals official step children projects ... it's Linux Mint, shrugs. Guess the people at LM HQ don't want it that way. As posted in the book above though ... Think it's common knowledge LM started as a derivative work of ubuntu and none of the people at LM HQ I've ever seen make it a secret that some of the software they're making is based on ubuntu's. Also see above bk on ubuntu vs Debian ... Most of ubuntu is Debian's stuff.

One time was curious went looking and found a recently updated webpage maintained by canonical. On it they said 4 out of 5 of the software packages they were using were unaltered Debian. Basic math = 80% then, with unknown % being something canonical actually developed to use in ubuntu themselves. Then there's all the other opensource projects software they use, that canonical has nothing to do with ... DE's/WM's, tons of other stuff that's incorporated into ubuntu. Making up x% more of ubuntu, that isn't made by canonical. Always made me scratch my head wondering how much of ubuntu, even is ubuntu ? From what I gathered, it's an oddball subject as to what makes up a "distro" of gnu/Linux.

If I take a toyota, take all the emblems off of it. Put my own on and install a steering wheel I made myself. Does that make it a new kinda car ? A new distro of car ? Personally don't think so, think it'd just make it a weird toyota, lol.

Guessing LM by recognition, popularity and making software a lot of people really like. Will have definitely moved them into the distro in their own right category. Ubuntu was supposed to make Debian Linux user friendly for the masses and LM is supposed to be ( and think is) ubuntu done right. Which would make ubuntu, ubuntu done wrong, lol. I agree with that too personally.

Though maybe not being fair or haven't given their software enough of a chance to know + oooor maybe just don't know what I'm talking about, more shrugs. I haven't tried each and every release made by both LM and canonical or people "officially" working with canonical's gnu/nix either. So some may be better, worse or whatever than others no doubt.

Don't and never will get the ubuntu craze though. In that age old question ... What came 1st, the chicken or the egg ? ... ans: DEBIAN did. More fun babbling ( or not) about this. Though o course Debian isn't the oldest project or distro on the blk. Think they recently celebrated their 18th official birthday. So they've been around a longgggg time and their software has been the grandfather of mucho, many, mas gnu/nix distro's. Have tons of respect for the people who've done all that work on Linux. As well as the other ancient distro's too. Really like Debian, like LM ... Not so much canonical/buntu. Opinions, preferences and mileage varies for sure.

END POINTLESS BABBLING POST:

Nah ... end on a happy note. Don'tcha just luv happy endings ?

No matter which ya like, use or prefer though. Gnu/Linux and all the oceans of great opensource are a total WIN! imo. Hats off to all the great geekettes/geeks and opensource developers of the world, past/present and future ! Keeping the world safe from the likes of M$ ! May the flying spaghetti monster rain endless blessings down upon you ! D:

All kidding aside, really am blown away and grateful for what they do ( done ).

[lmintnewb]

DANG IT !!! misfire ... nevermind.

[randomizer]

Official derivatives will probably be bound by the 6 month release cycle for starters. Mint's development philosophy is a whole lot different to Canonical's, so the two are best left separate.

[Bob E]

lol ... oh, you mean why isn't LM officially under the umbrella of the people at canonical ?

That would be like Harry Potter joining The Death-Eaters.

[lmintnewb]

^lol ... definitely one way to look at it. Am trying to curb myself when it comes to pointless bashing. So canonical and the embodiment and incarnation of pure evil on earth, when it comes to software ... aka: M$, are safe from me for awhile. Not worth the energy it takes to gripe about things. May as well save my breath and don't really need da typing practice anyway.

[RETNUH]

Just to make sure I got this, It is because if Mint was an official derivative it would limit what Clem could do with Mint. This is correct yes?

[Bob E]

Just to make sure I got this, It is because if Mint was an official derivative it would limit what Clem could do with Mint. This is correct yes?

Pretty much. But I think you are still missing the big picture. Say you want a cheese burger. You go to a fast food place and get something that resembles a cheese burger. Disappointed with what "they" call a cheese burger, you decide to make your own cheese burger the way YOU want it. Bigger, better, fresher. Now, look at Ubuntu 11.04 and Mint 11 Katya. There's no Unity on Katya and many people are very happy about that. That's because he wants HIS distro to be HIS way. Bigger, better, and more appealing to Linux users. IF Mint was an official Ubuntu derivative, he would have to follow the guidelines set forth by Ubuntu, which means Katya would have Unity and would be as crappy as Ubuntu 11.04.

[RETNUH]

Got it.

Thank you.

[randomizer]

IF Mint was an official Ubuntu derivative, he would have to follow the guidelines set forth by Ubuntu, which means Katya would have Unity and would be as crappy as Ubuntu 11.04.

Not necessarily. There are 3 other derivatives which fall under the "official" umbrella which do not use Unity. I think it's the release schedule that would be enforced more strongly than anything else. We're all speculating though, since we've probably not read any documentation about what is involved or even bothered to hop onto a mailing list and ask (I haven't anyway) All the other official derivatives use Ubuntu's build system as well, but I'm not sure if that's mandatory or simply preferred by those distros because of the maturity of the build system.

[tacoz]

I moved from OpenSuse to LM when a freebie LM 3.0 CD arrived on my desk.
Back those days... if one looked at the derivatives mentioned on Ubuntu's site... you would've seen amongst others, Linux Mint listed!

[w2ibc]

one of the big things I think that makes Mint better then buntu is pretty much all the media codex's are installed. (if LM was "official buntu" I dont think they would allow that)

and thank god LM kept gnome instead of switching to unity!