Well, you can always maintain it as community edition imo. kde-git is great, default theming as well 
If you are seriously interested in maintaining this one, I'd say go for it!
1 Like
Yes please. “KDE Edge” that’s a little more vanilla in appearance and follows KDE development. 
Not fussed about a different kernel - remember that this has to boot and operate on a wide variety of systems, so sticking to a repo kernel as the default is going to work better overall (people can still install whatever they want afterwards).
2 Likes
We might ask @IslandC0der (maintainer of a lot of kde-git packages) if he has interest in collaborating 
this way he gets bug reports and all Arch users better -git packages 
if you are interested, I could ask him @alexjp
3 Likes
What about support for all these Garuda editions?
Things like adding different kernels, etc., are going to drum up compatibility issues, especially with all the newbies. Will these have a general "we do not support these additions" much like the Garuda Barebones edition, or are the maintainers going to cover the support?
I can see the forum being hit with even more help requests. 
2 Likes
For compatibilities sake IMO a single Kernel should be the the distro’s aim. The LTS kernel is used as an option on several editions as a troubleshooting alternative for those having installation problems. However, using multiple different kernels does tend to complicate support. The choices should stay Zen or LTS IMO. To me those choosing the older traditional style of Cinnamon might actually be more suited to the LTS kernel, but it is easily changeable by the user anyways.
6 Likes
There’s a common base to all Garuda editions for this reason. Someone making an official edition will have to conform to that. 
4 Likes
ok, got it about the custom kernel.
the reason is that meanwhile I have to use xanmod to get the amd-pstate features. but I guess in the near future it will be on zen also.
is there a list or wiki of the things one has to abide to? I totally understand that changing too much will only give more nightmares to the underpaid support team. 
sure! from the search I did when last time kwin-git wasn’t working very well, I think he was from the same country as I am, so should be easy to communicate with him
how can I mantain it as a “community edition” vs “official edition” ? I was thinking doing it community like and … well… see how it goes! maybe nobody likes it
2 Likes
There can be only one.
The official Garuda KDE version is Dragonized 
5 Likes
Btw @dr460nf1r3 , is there a way to talk to you directly to coordinate something like this?
Currently kde-git is not working, and generally broken 
sniff
( currently there are some plasma widgets not working and some symbols missing from some packages )
@jonathon sorry, you can merge this one too if needed.
1 Like
I suspect either PM if it's private or a new thread in #development would be fine.
2 Likes
Sure, you can pm me if you want
2 Likes
I'd love the suckless edition. DWM, or i3-gaps, or bspwm, polybar, couple of text edtors, and some light theming 
1 Like
@4L1V3
I think that arch base itself doen't really follow KISS anymore. If I will ever do my own small distro I will choose something like Void because it's much smaller and yet pretty stable. It's also very easy to setup your own package sources. And I don't think Garuda actually needs this. I'm leaning to make experimental Arcan desktop editions but it's still a lot to unpack and actually make one.
1 Like
What are you thoughts on Artix?
@zoeruda I don't think that I need anything other than runit for now, so I don't see a point in Artix. If I will ever need some cool service/boot management I'll look into s6/66 which is unoficcially supported in Void. I dislike the current state of pacman and AUR too. Since I can't apply my own patches, why would I use that instead of xbps-src? Artix is better, but I'm still going to stick to Void.
1 Like
Its not that I think void is bad, but in my mind there is only 3 interesting linux distros ( I mean interesting, in ... interesting to me, so this is my opinion ):
gentoo, garuda and nixos. ( i mean garuda, not arch... because I don't have much interest in arch, its kinda like void ... good but not necessarily interesting )
1 Like
Yeah void is not that interesting, it's just practical. xbps-src is so flexible that you can even use it on other distros. And runit is beatifully simple. But yeah, it's really nothing that special. I would change a lot in my distribution of void. Like since GNU utils are not really required (apart from bash) I might try busybox/toybox and see if it makes any speed difference.
2 Likes
I find Nixos, Garuda and Void as the most "interesting" distros out there. NixOS due to its unique structure, Garuda as an "opinionated" that in my opinion is better than pure Arch or other Arch derivatives, and Void as a rolling release alternative to Arch with good sense on minimalism and simplicity (no Systemd being a huge part of that).
3 Likes