[CentOS-devel] What name would be acceptable for Desktop version of CentOS?

On 01/20/2012 07:37 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic<office at plnet.rs>  wrote:
>>
>> I would like to stay as close as possible to CentOS name, because it
>> practically is CentOS, with third-party repositories enabled. Intention
>> is to provide easily installable packages from various repositories, but
>> I have no desire to make it into developing distro, just a bunch of
>> carefully chosen and above all as stable as possible packages sitting on
>> top of the CentOS (with as little as possible replaced packages) that
>> will attract Desktop users wanting stability above all, but not
>> knowledgeable enough to decide what package from what repository they
>> are to chose.
>
> Why bother spinning an install for that?  A repository-release file
> and list of packages or group for yum should work on top of a standard
> install.   I've always thought there should be some standard/easy way
> for anyone to publish a set suitable for some particular use, but I
> don't think it really exists.
>

The problem is that regular CentOS .repo files, and .repo files of all 
third-party repositories have no concept of "priorities", so what must 
be done is to totally replace all .repo files, and I do not feel 
comfortable with calling such a move a minor one. Also, At least on 
repository must be more important then stock CentOS repositories, so 
overrides can be done.

My wish is to create LiveDVD, and even regular install ISO's with at 
least ElRepo driver packages, and those ISO's can not be called CentOS 
since CentOS brand = ~100% RHEL clone without any additions.


-- 

Ljubomir Ljubojevic
(Love is in the Air)
PL Computers
Serbia, Europe

Google is the Mother, Google is the Father, and traceroute is your
trusty Spiderman...
StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant