A new Linux distro: Hadron is ready

>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.

(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.

Best of luck guys!

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.

is it targeted for server use? desktop? embedded system? mobile system? How is it better than anything else?

and, how long is it going to be supported and how big is the core team? (let me guess: just one developer and one user who is also the developer)

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?

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.