I know it has been a while since I've been posting here, but if I may I would like to throw my two cents in.
I would dare to venture that Vector approaches the Live CD front backwards. If we are serious about doing a Live CD, why not develop to that as the standard? i.e. Instead of developing Vector Standard, then porting to LIVE, why not develop Vector Standard as LIVE from the get-go?
The Pros as I see it would be:
- Everyone is using the same version of Standard, SOHO, Deluxe, etc.
- People are able to test the new versions without needing to repartion or otherwise endanger their main machine.
- Unifies the base, resulting in a decrease in the workload of both developers and testers.
- Removes the "huh?" factor when someone installs with the LIVE version.
I suppose that possible cons would be:
- Not enough people know how to work in a LIVE environment.
- When is a distro actually "done"?
However, it seems that this is the best way to condense the workload for everyone.
Also, about the discontinuation of SOHO:
Initially I was against this, but upon further thinking, it does make sense. Do we really need more than a "Base" version of Vector? As long as packaging is still done for KDE, OOo, etc., we aren't losing anything. In this way it should simplify development quite a bit.
This would allow for mainly two releases, Standard 32-bit and 64-bit. From there you have the building blocks, everything you need
to run a computer, and if you find you want
something more, hit the repo and you're good to go.
To some who say this would be a penalty against Vector, have you EVER had an opporating system that you were 100% satisfied with from install? Not even with Windows, the largest operating system base, do people merely install Windows and call it a day. I, myself, add browsers, office suites, protection-services, email programs, media players, etc., before I begin to consider Windows "useable". Again, so long as packages are available to add, Vector is in good shape.