People have difficulty comprehending the amount of #Linux Distributions: they see 1000+1 versions advertising themselves as "xxx OS".

I think that the #Linux naming scheme should be better. A fork of #fedora gets its own name like "Ultramarine OS". This implies that it is a standalone #Linux distribution, from scratch. This is not the case, as it is just #fedora with little, little tweaks and pre-adjustments.

Some forks:

change desktop environment,

remove or include bloat,

add a few preinstalled apps,

use a different theme,

test it,

change wallpaper, calling it a day and almost branding it as their own.

You can litterally automate the abovementioned tasks (downloading apps and desktop environment, theming and remove bloat) and get the same result.

I don't think this "issuance" of brand identities should be that easy (yes, they've scarcity).

It is like the ship of Theseus. How much can you change while being the same?

I think Linux distributions should be classified using these factors:

- upstream or independed presence

(#linux distributions like "GrapheneOS" that really help create solutions)

- extensibilty (download manager etc)

(Biggest usability difference)

- why it stands out

(special features like 'yast' from #opensuse or homebrewed contributions)

- purpose

(servers, users, lightweight, bitcoin, supercomputers, mobile, stability, etc)

- philosophy

(to predict where the project is and will be going.)

I think that the name should always tell if it is using #linux kernel/#bsd.

then, the name of the independend distribution.

then, the other upstreams and its own name.

#Linux>independend distro>upstreams and own name

(could be in a different order.)

So Examples Given:

#Pop_OS! --> #Linux #debian #ubuntu pop

#Fedora --> #Fedora #Linux

#Linux #mint #debian edition --> #Linux #Debian #mint

#Android --> #Android #Linux

#Manjaro --> #Linux #Arch #Manjaro

#ChromeOS --> #Gentoo #Chrome #Linux

#Ubuntu --> #Linux #Debian #Ubuntu

#Void #Linux --> #Linux #Void

As you can see, some distro's will get a really absurd name, implying that it is a fork of a fork, which is in my eyes pointless.

or it could be something like

`Linux Mint.deb`, `Linux Bitkey.deb`

It would make it alot more understandable for new users and also limit the pointless forks so that it is easier to focus code review and audits.