Talk:Mageia

Number of Pages

Since the Mageia organization is brand new, and the distro certainly doesn't even exist yet, I don't see a need for two pages- one for the organization and one for the distribution. It might be wise to separate the two later. The creation of the page has no references, because the information was only obtained from the announcement posted on their main website as the main page. They have no other sub-pages. It is highly likely that information will disappear, be replaced, or moved somewhere else in a short time.--Crxssi (talk) 22:52, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Someone removed the proposed logo, which is perfectly fine if it is not going to be used (it was mostly just a placeholder, and was clearly marked as "one of several proposed logos"). However, if you remove or edit anything on the page, it is good practice to state what you are doing and *why*. This can be done in the box called "Edit summary" and possibly also here. That will help prevent possible "edit wars". --Crxssi (talk) 22:22, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Origin of Distribution

The official websites doesn't say almost anything. Is this distro based on RedHat? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.57.166.138 (talk) 05:53, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Clean up sentence/section for clarity

This sentence should probably be rephrased or broken up to be more clear.

The next day, on September 18, 2010, some of these former employees, who were mostly responsible for the development and maintenance of the Mandriva Linux distribution, and several community members announced the creation of Mageia, with the support of many members of the community of developers, users and employees of Mandriva Linux. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.40.160.233 (talk) 15:14, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Distinguishing Features

Probably users have reasons for using Mageia rather than one of the numerous other distributions. A short paragraph at least, with title such as "Distinguishing Features", would be appropriate. Regards, PeterEasthope (talk) 13:02, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Phylogeny

@Solbu. In your summary, you wrote, "Mandriva _IS NOT_ a fork of Mageia", which is correct. What is incorrect is your assertion that my phylogeny classified Mandriva as a fork of Mageia. The order in a phylogenetic tree does not matter (not for this type of phylogeny, anyway). Your alteration has simply placed OpenMandriva Lx, Mageia and ROSA Linux on a branch that split off together from Mandrake Linux (the future Mandriva), which is incorrect. All mine states is that Mageia forked from Mandriva before ROSA did. Please revert yourself. Ⰻⱁⰲⰰⱀⱏ (ⰳⰾ) 19:17, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

@Иованъ Well, the order of the tree is important. RedHat is the root, and at the end of the tree it looked like Mandrake was a fork of Mageia.

It used to say that Mandrake was a fork of Mageia, which forked from Unity, which forked from OpenSLS, which forked from Blackpanter, which forked from SAM, which forked from ALT Linux, whch forked from Demon, which forked from RedHat.

Clearly this is incorrect.

I have corrected the list to show how they relate to each other.

PS: I didn't mean to step on your toes. :-) Solbu (talk) 19:35, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

No harm done. But your revision is still wrong. It never said Mandrake was a fork of Mageia. Only that Mandrake and Mageia split from each other. I suggest reading up on phylogenetic trees before making further changes. Most, including this one, are lineage primacy-agnostic. Ⰻⱁⰲⰰⱀⱏ (ⰳⰾ) 21:26, 13 October 2025 (UTC)