A lot of debate today about “community” vs “corporate”-driven distributions. I (think I) understand the basic difference between the two, but what confuses me is when I read, for example:

…distro X is a community-driven distribution based on Ubuntu…

Now, from what I understand, Ubuntu is corporate-driven (Canonical). So in which sense is distro X above “community-driven”, if it’s based on Ubuntu? And more concretely: what would happen to distribution X if Canonical suddeny made Ubuntu closed-source? (Edit: from the nice explanations below, this example with Ubuntu is not fully realistic – but I hope you get my point.)

Possibly my question doesn’t make full sense because I don’t understand the whole topic. Apologies in that case – I’m here to learn. Cheers!

  • stravanasu@lemmy.caOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Absolutely fair point and warning. In the end we all need to earn money somewhere in order to live. I think the real greyscale distinction is not between “corporate” vs “community”, but on whether there’s some actor that can act whimsically while remaining unchecked. I believe that the two terms are being used in an oversimplified way in that sense.

    • nan
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      deleted by creator

      • stravanasu@lemmy.caOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        True that too. I’m realizing it’s really a matter and situation with many diverse important factors and degrees. As always, categorization only goes so far…