Ubuntu 23.04 with Plasma stripped
Last week the stable version of Ubuntu 23.04, and along with it two new flavors that are added to the Ubuntu Unity that arrived six months earlier. Total it's already 11, and it's too lazy to investigate which one we would like more, perform the installation from scratch... There are users who wonder, or rather wish, that Canonical would do, like Project Debian or the EndeavourOS developers: offer the possibility of installing the desktops from a single installer. Why isn't there this possibility?
At first, the answer is found in the philosophies of each project. Debian is one, one project to rule them all. The aforementioned EndeavorOS is a bit the same, and also based on Arch Linux that tends to be more based on the software. Canonical is a company, builds an operating system (Ubuntu), focuses on the major release (GNOME), and oversees o leer at official flavors, which are run by quasi-independent projects.
Installing a desktop in Ubuntu is not the same as using an option with more customization
Let's take an example, that of Kubuntu. Kubuntu is Ubuntu (everyone is), but it's not Ubuntu + KDE/Plasma; It's base Ubuntu, it does use KDE software, including its desktop, but the result of using the Kubuntu ISO is very different than what we'd get if we installed KDE from a general installer, aka netinstaller. Kubuntu is maintained by the KDE project, and they are also the ones who decide the design it should have, applications installed by default, themes and everything else. They have to do what Canonical tells them, like include Firefox like Snap, but for the rest they have some freedom.
Plasma is developed by KDE, but Plasma by default is not what we see in Kubuntu. Details like the logo on the bottom panel are a good example, a small example, but a sample of what I mean. What does Canonical gain from this? It is not intended to confuse users; is may we have a more polished option that if something is used by default, and delegate responsibilities and work to teams that better control each of the fields. And for this, Ubuntu Cinnamon has spent 4 years proving that it is capable of maintaining its flavor and that it does so with guarantees.
Could there be a netinstaller?
Well yes, and it should, but explaining how it works. basically what we will install the desktop, but in its purest form. That by installing Xfce we will not obtain the same as if we use the Xubuntu ISO, nor by installing Budgie will we obtain something with an interface as perfect as that of Ubuntu Budgie. That and that we will also be installing the necessary packages for each of the desktops to work.
Ubuntu 23.04 has come up with an option they call Mini-ISO, and could be a first step in creating your own netinstaller. Right now, its operation is different: we choose the version of Ubuntu that we want to install, download it to RAM and we have a Live Session of Ubuntu 22.04, 22.10 or 23.04. But this is not what some users in the community ask for.
If Ubuntu offered this installation medium, it could save some users work, especially if, in addition to a desktop, additional packages are installed to make everything look good. This is how others do it, so it should be possible with the one on Ubuntu. I would vote for them to create it, but perhaps also because the different flavors continue to exist. In fact, Debian also offers different ISOs, although they call it live Images. They offer ready-made images to install Debian with GNOME, Cinnamon, KDE, LXDE, LXQt, MATE, and Xfce, in addition to the standard option. There would be 7 flavors, "only" 4 less than Ubuntu, and in those 4 there is an option for education, another for content creators and another for users in China.
Nuance and semantics
This is a matter of minor nuances and the use of semantics. canonical advertise by all means that there are "Ubuntu Flavors" (flavors of Ubuntu), and the media echo it. Debian prefers to be a single project and its ISOs are called Live Images. Regarding the nuances, installing just a desktop is not the same as having a project create a more personalized and consistent image.
Now, I insist: my vote is for that image in which you choose what to install, at least if it is done well.
First of all, thanks for the clarification, as a debian* who just released a kubuntu on his main desktop, I didn't understand that ubuntu is with gnome and the rest are derivative works, I thought they were all from canonical.
Secondly, there should still be another flavor that installs the repositories of each of the derivative works on demand :)
*debian, what is said to be a debian I am not, I just use it (an analogy would be someone very interested in cars and their mechanics and an average driver).