Template talk:Linux-distro/Archive01

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 WTF? 2 Template:Unix-like 3 Reorder 4 Added "more.." 5 redisign

[edit] WTF?

Why are linux distros mixed with unix-like OSes?

Can linux distros have their own template, and another one for unix-like OSes, which would link just to Linux? --tyomitch 08:19, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Why would the UNIX template link to Linux?Fsiler 10:31, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

I have no objection to "mostly POSIX OSes" being lumped together in a category of reasonable name (eg UNIX or POSIX systems). However, calling such a category "Linux and other UNIXes" or similar is quite wrong. Additionally, using a penguin as a logo for such a template can only be called a travesty. This needs to be better thought out. I am removing the template from the FreeBSD and OpenBSD pages until this is resolved. Fsiler 10:31, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

What about "Linux distributions, BSDs and other Unix-like operating systems"? This is rather stylish, let's fix it and have it back. I don't care about the penguin but if you do, make a little daemon and and put it on too. NicM 14:03, 11 November 2005 (UTC).

IMO it's just as pointless as having a "Linux distributions, Windows, MacOSes and other operating systems" template. Why must we squeeze each and every unix-like thingy in a single template? --tyomitch 14:13, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

We don't, but a IMO loads of templates with very few entries is a bit pointless too. The BSDs and Linuxes do match together quite well since they are both free and open source. I would definitely suggest removing Solaris though. NicM 14:29, 11 November 2005 (UTC).

I beg to differ. These categories are technical in distinction, not political. If you want to have a category of "Free as in XYZ OSes", then it's fine to lump the BSDs and Linux together to the extent that they are free (note that the licensing is substantially different). Solaris, HP-UX, IRIX, Linux, and all the other UNIX-type OSes belong in a "mostly POSIX-ish" category, and Linux distros can have their own category. People tend to have this idea that there's Windows, and then there's this Linux thing, which includes Solaris, OS X, and anything else that's not Windows. Lumping BSDs in with Linux perpetuates this idea rather than dispelling it, and for that reason I am strongly opposed to having a "linux distro" template with anything other than Linux stuff listed. Fsiler 01:11, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Just found out: that's exactly how it's done on Polish Wikipedia — see how disgusting it is. --tyomitch 15:12, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, that is quite excessive and ugly. I don't think anyone would suggest going that far though. Just the BSDs and Linux distros would give enough entries to look good without going over the top and trying to cover every OS in one template. NicM 15:29, 11 November 2005 (UTC).

Would be nice if they were sorted alphabetically too. NicM 14:07, 11 November 2005 (UTC).

Or might be smart to remove Solaris and just make it "Linux distributions and BSDs". NicM 14:12, 11 November 2005 (UTC).

You can't fit them all into a single template without making articles stupidly bloated. You can't make it small without excluding a lot. This isn't going to happen. ¦ Reisio 16:51, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Unix-like

I've removed all the non-linux unixes from the template, and the template from all the non-linux pages. If someone goes ahead and creates a Template:Unix-like, that's fine. It noone does, I'll do that myself a little later. --tyomitch 15:14, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

OK, so I did create the template, and put a bunch of links in it, and inserted it into some articles. Provided there's no dispute over validity of the new template, I can add it to the remaining articles. --tyomitch 23:05, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

I think this is fine. NicM 08:32, 15 November 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Reorder

Organization would be nice, and make it easir to weed out other variants:

Debian variants

Ubuntu (Gnome)/Kubuntu (KDE)

• MEPIS
• Knoppix
  • Damn Small
• Morphix
• Xandros

Mandriva
Fedora (from Red Hat)
SuSE (from Slackware)
Gentoo
LFS

Other distros

Arch
CentOS
Puppy
Red Flag
PCLinuxOS
Fox

The idea is to merge general distro families with distrowatch rankings:

1. Ubuntu 2647> Deb
2. Mandriva 1695<
3. SUSE 1556< Slackware
4. Fedora 1147= RH
5. MEPIS 988< Deb
6. KNOPPIX 880> Deb
7. Debian 861> Deb
8. Damn Small 716< Deb Knop
9. Slackware 609=
10. Gentoo 603<
11. FreeBSD 489= BSD
12. Kubuntu 477= Deb
13. PCLinuxOS 433<
14. PC-BSD 384>
15. Xandros 369 Deb
16. Vector 363>
17. SLAX 358=
18. CentOS 347=
19. KANOTIX 329<
20. Puppy

Preferring to keep it in the top 15, Xandros barely makes the cut. Puppy, CentOS, etc. are well beneath the top 15, and Fox, Arch, RedFlag arent even there. LFS should be there as a general "family." -St|eve 20:15, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

I think it will be hard to group/show relationships without making the template cluttered with text or punctuation. I'd be happy to lose any that don't have a substantial Wikipedia article, or perhaps are <15 or 20 on distrowatch (leaving out the BSDs), or if anyone can come up with other criteria. NicM 21:07, 23 November 2005 (UTC).

There seems to be no opposition by now, so is it OK for me to go ahead and delete Arch, CentOS, Fox, Morphix, Puppy, Red Flag, and Red Hat from the template? --tyomitch 11:45, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Personally, I'd use top 20 and keep Puppy and CentOS, but it is fine by me if you prefer to do top 15. Is it best to remove {{linux-distro}} from the removed distro's pages? NicM 14:28, 25 November 2005 (UTC).

No, let the template remain there. It's even reasonable to add it to more obscure distros' articles, if there are any. Cf. Intel 8087, Intel 80287, Intel 80387, and Intel 80487, which all contain Template:Intel processors, even though that template doesn't link to any of the x87's. --tyomitch 09:56, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

I think the template header should say "Most used Linux distributions" or something like that, if we use a distrowatch rankings to choose which distros to include and which not to. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.44.150.171 (talk • contribs) December 2 2005.

I don't like this, even now as "Most popular". It's now ugly and the previous version was perfectly accurate (it was a list of Linux distributions, even if not complete). I'll leave it for now until others express their opinion. NicM 16:19, 2 December 2005 (UTC).

It's in fact most notable Linux distributions; note how Red Hat was kept though it's rather low at distrowatch. It doesn't claim to be an exhaustive list, either. Cf. other nav templates; none of them says most notable explicitely. --tyomitch 16:33, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Added "more.."

I try... I've added "more..." at the end of the list, linking to List_of_Linux_distributions. This makes clear it is a list of some distros but that a more complete list is available too. I wait for comments and opinions. Regards. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.44.150.171 (talk • contribs) 3 December 2005.

IMO that's perfectly fine. --tyomitch 21:03, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't think that the dash must be spaced away from "edit". It just doesn't look right to me; and dashes don't always have to be spaced. --tyomitch 13:12, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

In a real sentence, you do not have to space dashes, but this is really a diagram rather than text so I think no spaces makes it look a bit ugly and squashed, particularly because the ellipsis have a large amount of white space above them, the words have different font sizes and the |s are spaced, so it looks oddly unbalanced not to space one separator. A better solution, if it is possible, may be to move the edit link out of the list and into the top right of the heading opposite the Tux image, similar to how edit appears in section headings.

Or, if it is to stay where it is, how about:

| more… (edit )

or using an em dash:

| more…—(edit )

With the edit full size but without the brackets, a black dash runs into the e too much IMO, although I like this better than with a small edit:

| more…—edit

NicM 14:04, 3 December 2005 (UTC).

Actually, it should really be an em rather than en dash in any case and an unspaced em dash with a small edit looks less squashed, so maybe it is an acceptable option:

| more…—edit

NicM 14:12, 3 December 2005 (UTC).

I think this would be pretty good:

	Linux distributions	edit

NicM 14:23, 3 December 2005 (UTC).

The lilac background broken in two parts doesn't appeal to me. OTOH, how about my current version? --tyomitch 14:42, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

(PS. I tried to put "edit" on the continuous lilac background, and spent half an hour to no avail; help from a css guru would really be appreciated.)

White background is okay by me until a guru appears (I can't figure it out either ;-), but I think it's better with the edit text vertically centred. NicM 15:23, 3 December 2005 (UTC).

Is the hard <br/> tag necessary? This requires a certain screen width/font size, or will produce ugly breaks. &ndasb Ylai 21:03, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] redisign

I've redisigned the template to use folddown divs and to have the edit link like the unix-like template. Now see Linux for folddown divs in action. Let me know what you think. Just another star in the night ^{T | @ | C} 13:02, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Very nice. I increased the font size to 100% since I didn't see any reason to make it harder to read ;-). NicM.