Google Groups

Re: [ul-developers] Re: Quá ít 2012 beta

David Baum Nov 3, 2011 11:30 PM
Posted in group: ul-developers

It seems like PCLOS dev should put his nose everywhere:

1. Thomas has a right to publish his remaster even on MS forum, nobody and license can prohibit that, but only you put nose into the issue.
2. Everybody can do a remaster for any target and to publish it anywhere until there are any changes in the license and integrated some commercial products into a distro, but you put again your nose, claiming like you have not a right for that.
3. Two years ago, when Thomas was a part of SAMity Linux (former SAM Linux), you just moved to Phoenix Linux by saying to us: "Why are still developing the distro based on PCLOS? Your are not allowed to do" WTF? Again you put your nose, even though we were the first who made the PCLOS XFCE remaster.

I am coming from the world of the Web and Mobile development, I did some patches for NoSQL CouchDB and python-couchdb, that doesn't mean that i cannot publish them on GitHub.

So John, What is the problem here?

David Baum

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 2:05 AM, Chris Evans <> wrote:

From: JohnW57 <>
To: ul-developers <>
Sent: Thursday, November 3, 2011 6:41 PM
Subject: [ul-developers] Re: Quá ít 2012 beta

Hi Kaleb

I'm not complaining here, I give only a comment!
I have no problem with his PCLOS remaster!
He have all the right to do that.

I comment only he's using UL-developers to publish it as Qua It beta
(UL-branch based distro)

You said this is a public mailing list it gives me the right to make

Think it is (or was) a better idea he had published on the PCLOS


On 3 nov, 21:13, Kaleb <> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 8:08 PM, JohnW57 <> wrote:
> > Thomas: PCLOS is not UL and you did release a beta release with  the
> > branchename Qua It.
> > You did remaster a PCLOS install with mylivecd (modified mklivecd) and
> > this have nothing to do with UL!!
> > Please release a BETA under the name from the UL branch with the MDV
> > packages and made with your tools!!
> > Devnet said to me:  PCLOS is a another beast (in a blog).
> > Respect that!!  (this not a flame as PCLOS member against UL)
> > JohnW57
> John,
> Why are you (a PCLOS person), coming here (the UL public mailing list) to
> complain that Thomas made a pre-release based on PCLOS? If anybody ever had
> a right to complain about it, we would, not you. We aren't complaining. We
> understand.

Those of us that have been involved in Unity for some time now, understand that we all use different stuff, go about things in different ways, especially considering how alot of distros handle things. we here at unity have always been about using whatever we need to, to get the job done. even if that means using another distro, or packages from somewhere else. hell, I'm using a remaster of a remaster of pclos zen mini done by dragynn. devnet was running linux mint for awhile there, we have users that love arch, we are all over the place. unity is a community of misfits, hackers and people that just don't really belong anywhere but here. if thomas wants to use pclos, I'm all for it. I thinnk we can all agree there never was a problem with pclos as a distro, it works great. the community though, well imo they suck ass lmao

More options: