On 01/22/2012 06:26 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote: > On 01/23/2012 12:15 AM, Tom Sorensen wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic<office at plnet.rs> wrote: >>> P.S. I was hoping for help about the name from this thread, not concept >>> criticism based on drafted text. >> Desktop Enterprise Linux or Community Desktop Enterprise Linux, since >> one of the CentOS devs has already complained about trademark likeness >> and none of the others have stepped in to disagree. > Till such time as a package manifest is published, the name and content > are a bit academic to discuss</opinion> OP stated right off, "practically just to add useful packages," So, the base of the "package manifest" is CentOS right from the start. I also concur with the thinking that OP is starting a new distro, With "distro" heavily defined by the resultant .repo files. Along those lines, I'd suggest "the name" (the key here, and subject to this thread) be completely non-CentOS oriented, *unless* .repo files are kept as shipped. OP also stated intent to "to totally replace all .repo files". In other words, the name should not be CentOS oriented in any way. That said, however, the CentOS connection should be *documented* well, along with the all aspects of the distro. jerry ps. I'd probably commit some time this, or similar, Desktop effort. After several years with a Fedora workstation at my work place, I switched to CentOS at the release of 6.0. Lets just say I owe my employer hundreds of hours back for the futile effort. :-( p.p.s. Now running EL 6 as my workstation has fun stuff (in KDE), yet very stable, and has virtual potential (with the right hardware). It's getting close to having a Mac or Windows PC. :-)