Philosophy of Omarchy 3.2

[tionichm]

Hi everyone.

I recently booted up my machine and noticed that with release, an entirely new mirror had been introduced to ensure a bit more stability.

I am aware that I can change this to whatever I want, however, this change has made me a bit unsure with which opinions and philosophies drive the development/defaults of Omarchy - especially when these diverge from those of Arch.

Sure, we have omacom, but who's the chef?

I viewed Omarchy as a "convenience" distro. I thought of it as Arch with some nice presents that makes everyone's life a bit easier without being too intrusive. Right now, it's looking like it's really becoming it's own thing - like Manjaro. Is that the goal here?

[HundredBillion]

I want Omarchy to be it's own thing.

I'm currently trying to get my webcam to work and it doesn't work because I'm on the IPU6 driver. This driver doesn't work on Linux very well.
intel/ipu6-drivers#356

I'm trying to see if I can make a fix for this, but if I do make a fix, where should I submit a PR to?

I doubt Linux or Arch will approve my PR anytime soon.
If I submit it to Omarchy, it might have a chance at getting approved much faster.

But then what does that mean for Omarchy? Does Omarchy want to be in the business of maintain drivers for the Arch linux kernal?

Probably not if it is just going to be an "Arch Linux" flavor.

But if Omarchy wants to be user friendly and follow a "convention over configuration" worldview, then yes I think Omarchy should maintain drivers that don't work on Linux.

[brink-lab]

Who's the chef? Ultimately DHH.

I have been following Omarchy from early days, so I can see some guiding principles and ambitions that have driven Omarchy to where it is today:

• A preconfigured Arch + Hyprland setup that works out of the box. Including utilities such as screen capture tools.

• Particularly catering to professional developers which raises the bar for stability and dependability. DHH is building this for himself and his team of developers. If you depend on your setup to do your everyday work, it's not feasible to risk breaking the system when updating. This is likely what has been the driving factors for moving core packages behind Cloudflare. In the early days of Omarchy, it was quite the problem that AUR was down often as it resulted in too many bad updates. DHH were in contact with people behind Arch to help get Cloudflare protection for the repository, but they didn't want to, so Omarchy did it and moved forward. In terms of the Arch mirror there is still the choice to be on the bleeding edge as normally, OR to be on a slightly lagging and more stable mirror. What's not to like? :)

• Out of the box support for Intel Macs (wifi and keyboard drives included). Wouldn't be surprised if M-chip macs will at some point also be included via Asahi Linux.

• And then there are the very nice and custom quality of life features such as menus for installing and removing apps, development tools, service installation helpers for e.g. Dropbox, and other custom things that make it easier to cross over from another OS.

A lot of this has either been there from early days or voiced as goals, so from my PoW Omarchy was never just meant to be another rice.
I don't think there is a formulated end-goal, but does there have to be? And isn't it better to let Omarchy evolve and become something potentially even better?