I think one valid reason for creating a new distribution is if you have some architectural ideas you want to experiment with. A fresh distro may be easier then trying to modify an existing one, due to fewer cascading effects of your changes. But in that case, I would start with something like Linux from Scratch and go from there.
Ideas that I've personally wanted to work on involve system initialization procedures (this was before Upstart came around), packaging tools, overall package layouts, etc. But if I did that I probably wouldn't promote the distro, since it would probably be useless to anyone else but those working on the specific projects.
(I suppose its a wildebeast but it looks like a cow)
"As you may know, Hadron has only two active developers, me and seqizz. In order to develop Hadron healthfully, we need more developers." -- Burak Sezer
Basically a couple of guys built a package management system and then used that to create a Linux distribution. They don't know the difference between Unix and Linux and they don't have any real reason for creating a new distro other than they could, and they are very enthusiastic about it.
It brings back fond memories of folks running out to create a rock band.
Hi guys. I'm the one of them involved in this. Thanks for your time and comments.
Hadron was just a prototype and we made it for "fun". Yes you've read it right. We're not trying to compete with another distro. We don't "aim" somewhere also. It's too fresh to aim somewhere. We don't even desktop environments in our repo (except xfce). As xxqs said, we're not more than 3 people. (I guess that's because we're in Turkey, but it's long story). We made Hadron in a few night hours.
Again, Hadron is an alive prototype. We've released it so you can check a new package management system. Which we think is good enough to continue. Eh?
About the "Unix" thing, I guess it's a typo. Thanks for pointing it.
1.) On the About page, the very first sentence states "Hadron is a Unix distribution which is based on Linux kernel and GNU operating system". Linux is not Unix, but they refer to it as "Unix" throughout the website.
I'm not trying to be pedantic, but to me, this demonstrates poor situational and historical awareness.
2.) Who's responsible for this project? It's not straightforward to figure that out.
3.) A new package manager I've never heard of. This is fine, but combined with #2 -- I'll wait a while.
It looks like the creator is Burak Sezer, "a Metallurgical & Materials Engineering student at Yildiz Technical University from Istanbul". His website is http://purak.org/
1. The distribution does not provide pre-compiled packages. It only provides package building scripts ....
2. Hadron is fully free. It only contains free(free as in freedom) software.
3. As possible as up-to-date and stable.
Reading the first two points together, do I understand correctly that I cannot use the package manager to install proprietary binaries like graphics drivers? Is there room for flexibility akin to Arch's AUR setup for user-management of such packages?
What does that third point mean, exactly? Am I dealing with something closer to Debian Stable or a rolling-release system?
My thoughts exactly. The power user market is saturated with Gentoo/Arch/BSDs and even Debian for some, we really don't need any more right now. I was hoping this was a new user-friendly competitor to Ubuntu because I can't recommend Ubuntu to newcomers anymore and Fedora and Mint always rubbed me the wrong way.
The only thing I can think of is that Hadron is completely Free Software. I don't know of any way on Gentoo to not use non-Free, particularly in satisfying dependencies. (It's been a Very Long Time since I've touched Gentoo, though; that may have changed.)
Gentoo has a license masking feature described at [1]. You specify in make.conf a list of licenses that you like and do not like, and it will not install things that do not match that mask.
>These patterns are mostly borrowed from BSD family and Gentoo Linux.
No. Stop blaming your horrible distros on BSDs. All the BSDs provide binary packages and encourage users to use them. Typing "make install" and watching the build script compile and package an identical binary package as the one on the public FTP servers is not learning anything, and does not make your system "advanced". Exposing the package build system to users lets them build custom packages when needed. It makes absolutely no sense to then say "we won't provide any binary packages for you" and force everyone to always compile everything themselves.
"I was given access to the most amazing tools and technology humanity has ever known and was born with an incredibly ability to use them. Now I'm going to go out of my way to make it harder for others to follow in my footsteps."
It's a massive shame that such a specific and high level skill-set is squandered doing something so completely useless.
>6- Why did you create a new distro? Because we can.
I am probably going to get my karma downgraded but I have to say what I think. The world doesn't need another me too Linux distro, what a waste.