I don't think that we should call BeUnited's effort to disseminate BeOS a
"distribution". This implies fundamentally different components -- in the
same way that slackware and debian linuces have different components, and
do not interoperate in *key* ways.
Instead, BeUnited is (to my understanding) trying to do something
different.
1 -- it seems like BeUnited wants to release the "official" openBeOS and
be the clearinghouse for distribution.
2 -- BeUnited is recruiting developers to make product that works with
openBeOS.
3 -- BeUnited is recruiting hardware folks to make drivers so that
openBeOS will work with hardware
To me it seems like this is more akin to the relationship between computer
OEMs and Windows, than Distros and Linux. But different in that: 1
BeUnited probably won't put their logo on the boot screen.
In essence, this sort of a relationship takes a lot off of the hands of
openBeOS developers, and concerns like those that are being discussed in
this thread,
we wouldn't have to worry about (and theoretically be freed to do more
coding =P). Of course, I don't know if this relationship between openBeOS
and BeUnited has been determined yet.
Isaac
