[Suggestion] Add new option to LM installer: just Cinnamon DE

[cstamas]

Would be cool, if there would be an option in installer (just like there is one for 3rd party codecs), to install "Just Cinnamon DE".

Reasoning: to achieve something like this in more simpler way: viewtopic.php?f=42&t=359283

So, no need for post-install "clean up". I think this would be really easy to implement, as it just means "omit" some (pseudo) packages from install.

What would be ideal (when this option checked) -- am mostly speaking about desktop applications:
* install all from "Cinnamon universe", as things like Cinnamon, Hypnotix, Warpinator etc as they are "enough fresh" (they are maintained by LM team)
* do NOT install any desktop application like LibreOffice, as who checked this, wants really "just a Cinnamon DE"

So to say, be more like macOS or Windows are: after installation, all you get is "just fully functioning desktop" (with nemo and utilities), but next step is to install GUI/desktop apps you want (and you want probably flatpak ones).

Thanks!

[Moem]

I think that is a bad fit for the purpose of Mint... after all, it was intended to be a full-featured system that comes with most of the applications that most users need, right out of the box. It was never intended to be a lean or minimal system.

[RollyShed]

* do NOT install any desktop application like LibreOffice,

So to say, be more like macOS or Windows are: after installation, all you get is "just fully functioning desktop"

How can that be a fully functioning desktop?
NOTE the words - fully functioning.

but next step is to install GUI/desktop apps you want (and you want probably flatpak ones).

Which means YOU now have to install those things to make it a fully functioning desktop. And why flatpak?

Personally, it doesn't make sense.

[cstamas]

it was intended to be a full-featured system that comes with most of the applications that most users need

Right. But it will be NOT full-featured if they don't check the codecs checkbox, will it? And all I think I need, is just a checkbox too

NOTE the words - fully functioning

You missed one word: "fully functioning desktop". So, desktop, not fully functioning workstation/install/whatever.

I think you both are missing the point: am not talking about "minimal install" as usually distros have today. Am talking about DE-only, so along with all the apps that LM team is maintaining (xed, warpinator, etc). But not 3rd party desktop apps like LibreOffice. All I want is Cinnamon desktop. IF I check that checkbox (in same manner as I check the checkbox to install codecs).

And flatpak, as I don't want to lag major versions behind in case of apps like LibreOffice is (so distro pkg version vs flatpak version). That's all. Could be AppImage as well, but it does not provide auto update. And am completely aligned re Snaps with LM team. So what remains?

[Moem]

I think you both are missing the point

Fine, if you think that, then you think that. In fact, I think something quite similar about you. Not a problem... we don't have to agree.

[cstamas]

Cool, that's as you say: fine.

But I did explain my point: I would like a Linux Mint Cinnamon Desktop

What is your point? I'd like to understand it.

From what you wrote: "It was never intended to be a lean or minimal system." -- I said and explained that I did not meant this suggestion to be "lean or minimal system" at all.

So what point I miss here? And as a sub-question: is system fully functional (in your sense) if user at install does NOT check the codecs checkbox?

[Moem]

But I did explain my point: I would like a Linux Mint Cinnamon Desktop

I have that! It's very nice. It came with a lot of useful software.
Some of it is third-party. I did not really care. I care that it gets the job done. And when I was new to Linux and to Mint, I was happy that it was already present after installation, giving me a system capable of doing most of the things I was used to doing. I did not have to hunt around for an office suite, it was already there. This made me feel like Mint was meant for my needs.

So what point I miss here? And as a sub-question: is system fully functional if user at install does NOT check the codecs checkbox?

I think you are missing the point that the team considers it helpful if new users find almost all of the software, that they want to use, pre-installed. That is a big part of the goal of Mint: that most new users can feel confident and at home with the system, as it comes out of the box, and don't have to delve into installing software right away.
Of course, another check box could be added in the installer. But having too many options to set in a standard installation is offputting and confusing to this default new user, that the team is building Mint for. It's probably not offputting to you and me, but we may be more experienced than that user.

As to your question: is system fully functional if user at install does NOT check the codecs checkbox?
That surely depends on what we use as a definition of 'fully functional'.

[cstamas]

I have that! It's very nice. It came with a lot of useful software.
Some of it is third-party. I did not really care. I care that it gets the job done. And when I was new to Linux and to Mint, I was happy that it was already present after installation, giving me a system capable of doing most of the things I was used to doing. I did not have to hunt around for an office suite, it was already there. This made me feel like Mint was meant for my needs.

Fully agreed here (albeit I started on S.u.S.E. around 1997) So maybe it's me: I got used to "adjust" (or "tailor") things that comes "out of the box" to my own needs (whether it is a new phone, a new laptop or a fresh OS install). There is no "one size fits all", it's always about compromises.

In fact a lot of people (even elder) around me are using LM set up by me (my old HW usual "decommissioning" path: someone in family inherits it, and is great for older HW). I call these "grandma installs", as everything is "automated" (latest Mint Updater changes rocks for this!)

On the other hand, I don't think this reasoning (and use case) above should hinder those wanting more, and I don't talk about "I use Arch" type of people But it maybe should/could help them. Like some "Advanced" button on installer, where you would have some choices, while w/o clicking on it, you'd have all as before.

I think you are missing the point that the team considers it helpful if new users find almost all of the software, that they want to use, pre-installed. That is a big part of the goal of Mint: that most new users can feel confident and at home with the system, as it comes out of the box, and don't have to delve into installing software right away.
Of course, another check box could be added in the installer. But having too many options to set in a standard installation is offputting and confusing to this default new user, that the team is building Mint for. It's probably not offputting to you and me, but we may be more experienced than that user.

I believe LM as a project is past this "convert users" phase: it's on top 5 in distrowatch since long time. Moreover, users wanting these "easy" installs does not have to be hindered at all by extra options jungle (looking at you yastinstaller). That said, I think the opposite is true as well: I don't think we need to be hindered by "easy" users either.

It's all implementation detail, and could be easily sorted out just like disk partitioning is: someone is not touching it (accepts defaults), and someone is adding partitions explicitly. Is like an Advanced button, somewhere in Installer Wizard, put discretely at panel bottom

In fact, I think that exactly disk partitioning bit in Installer defies your arguments about "new user" completely: it is possible to do, but is not obligatory.

As to your question: is system fully functional if user at install does NOT check the codecs checkbox?
That surely depends on what we use as a definition of 'fully functional'.

That's exactly am trying to find out: your definition of fully functional

[Moem]

Nah, I'm just one user... my opinions and definitions are not so relevant, really.
I do think that there are legal reasons for that codecs checkbox being present in the installer.

[AndyMH]

I believe LM as a project is past this "convert users" phase: it's on top 5 in distrowatch since long time. Moreover, users wanting these "easy" installs does not have to be hindered at all by extra options jungle (looking at you yastinstaller). That said, I think the opposite is true as well: I don't think we need to be hindered by "easy" users either.

We have enough problems already on this forum with newbies finding, what to us is a simple process, incredibly complicated. Adding additional options will just result in more posts here from the confused and increase the workload of those of us who try to help out.

On a practical note, the installer, ubiquity, is upstream, comes from canonical. I think any tinkering by the mint devs is minimal.

[RollyShed]

To the OP -
How many want your setup?
Is the time and effort to do what you want worth it?
No?

1.) There are 3 Mint systems, Cinnamon, MATE and Xfce. You now want a 4th variant. You and how many others?
2.) How many installations have you ever done? 40? 60?

Of those, how many would be the way you are suggesting? For those I've done (~50), none your way.

You want a flatpak LibreOffice. So? Delete the one that is there, that everyone else is happy with, and install a flatpak.

What else do you want removed that everyone else wants? When I do an installation there are a lot of "must haves" that I install. And you want fewer?

You want automatic updates. That's what killed Windows, for my partner.

You want to be in control of your apps yet you want automatic update - that doesn't make sense.

PPA - Power Purchase Agreement - Errrr???? OK, if your system, why not if you want something to work? In all the years (decade +) and installations I've never had a problem.

[cstamas]

No, I don't want 4th distro variant, I want cinnamon DE, why is everybody asking wrong question here?

Am on the phone, so will make it short: to me it looks like none of the reply writers did look at refd post, and watch the video in it. So let me repost it here:
https://youtu.be/Pzl1B7nB9Kc

In short, desktop applications will never be "right" when coming from a distro. Their desktop App was among the first users of AppImage for a reason... But I perso vote for flatpak, and flatpak is wonderfully integrated in LM. That's all.

So Cinnamon DE, yes, Cinnamon apps maintained by LM/Cinnamon devs yes (I think there is a big overlap in two sets), so that's the "core". Desktop "core", or GUI OS core. The rest I would like more fresh, please.

And that's my point: keep your installed deb pkg tree as close as possible to "factory" - hence minimize breakage possibility.

And how comes windows updater to the picture???

[Michael_Hathaway]

Would be cool, if there would be an option in installer (just like there is one for 3rd party codecs), to install "Just Cinnamon DE".

You are not alone here. I asked for a stripped down server version of Mint three or so years ago. I was told "NO". Haha.

I didn't push the subject. Instead I started writing a script that would just remove everything I didn't want. I got busy and never finished it. Now I just throw hardware at it and try not to be annoyed with the bloat I don't use.

[ricardogroetaers]

Observation:
- Programs for Windows are quite well known.
- There are several sites to download programs for Windows.
- Linux programs, not so much.
- The user who comes from Windows gets parachuted into Linux and asks: - Which Linux program exists to do a certain thing?
- So, the basic, the most popular, the most used by most people, reasonably, should come installed "out of the box".
- It is easier to uninstall a program than to search the Internet for a program you don't even know the name of.

[cstamas]

But LM Software Manager searches apps and even installs flathub stuff just fine, no? Why would you search? You need a software, go to software installer.

We talk about people needing "simple solutions" (hence we assume they want all OOTB), but now we talk about searching the internet for "linux apps"?

Even users of "granny installation" uses LM software Mgr just fine...

[cstamas]

And one more misconception: There is no such thing as "Linux programs" (I mean Linux desktop apps, but am using poster lingo).

(unless YOU BUILD it from source, but again, we are not talking about people doing that)

There are Linux Desktop apps (binaries, packages) built for distro A, distro B and so on. Explained in video why.

On Linux mint, an Ubuntu package will likely install (as LM is Ubuntu based, if same Ubuntu used as LM is based on), a Debian package may install (as Ubuntu is Debian based), while for example a Fedora package will most likely not install

With distro apps you are always bound to distro: if they did it, you have it (but most likely outdated). Or, some PPA may have it, but then you bring in some "foreign" elements to your deb package tree, your tree drifts away from factory, so you are on your own. Or, just use something that is at same time fresh while not messes at all with OS deb pkg tree. Win-win so to say.

[cstamas]

Nice post explaining exactly same thing I wish for LM:
https://baronhk.wordpress.com/2021/10/0 ... han-snaps/

Excerpts:
"You get software a lot faster than a distribution is going to package it" -- and is easier for app publishers as well: one target to build, not 10 if you target top 10 distros on distrowatch (and even then you will have users screaming "I want this app on my distro X!!!").
"Now I can just strap some Flatpaks onto Debian 11 and let Debian worry about keeping the underlying system nice and stable, and my computer working properly, and if there is a failure in one of my Flatpak apps, at least it doesn’t spill out and ruin the entire OS like a bad OS update could." -- as flatpak does NOT messes with deb packages at all, hence, does not endanger the "underlying system" (the DE and below).
... and so on, Worth to read it. In a sense, the blog author tend to have same/similar setup: have "core OS/DE" and just pull any (desktop/GUI) app he want onto using flatpak.

[ricardogroetaers]

The software present in the Software Manager or Synaptic are not always organized in a very intuitive way, the software descriptions are not always clear or translated and there are not always pictures of the software.
Those who are new to Linux know very well the difficulty.

I believe, unless you have a better understanding, that Linux Mint's desktop environments are customized by the team, they are not exactly the same as those distributed by their respective developers.
It seems, but I'm not sure, that the original environments are available in Synaptic for installation.

Software installed from a separate ".deb" file can be removed by Synaptic even if the ".deb" file has been lost.
This does not mess up the ".deb" package tree in any way.

As for the video, it is in English and without subtitles in another language. Impossible to understand.

[cstamas]

Re video translation: right lower you have a CC icon, click on it. Then the gear icon next to it, and set Auto-Translate and choose Portuguese. I tried with Hungarian, and it translated just nicely. Try it out!

[cstamas]

Also, just check out this (as I did mention LibreOffice several times):
https://repology.org/project/libreoffice/versions