Tha… That is a joke right??
You can NOT be serious!
If it is a proper distro for every user, where is the documentation?
I am in the exact same position, this is NOT good for KDE.
Especially since a LOT of KDE Neon users seems to think “this is KDE”, it is not.
I honestly hope that Neon won’t switch over.
I prefer the Ubuntu, based IMHO
It’s not a proper distro as mentioned in the FAQ. And you should use it “if you want the latest and greatest from the KDE community but the safety and stability of a Long Term Support release.”
BTW: This exactly what I want. Not that any other people should care about my personal preference 
Well if it switches to a rolling base then I’ll probably switch to kubuntu and call it a day. It’s not a big deal really.
Can I quote you on that in other threads?
That KDE Neon is NOT a distro?
Users on this forum should REALLY understand this!
I am not complaining at what it is, but I AM complaining that the USERS of said system does not seem to know that.
Sure! No problem! It is also written in KDE Neon’s FAQ page
Is it a distro?
Not quite, it’s a package archive with the latest KDE software on top of a stable base. While we have installable images, unlike full Linux distributions we’re only interested in KDE software.
I have tried that, people read what they want.
But a quote and a link to a dev might actually get some users to think one more time.
Thanks! 
Oh well. I’m just a seasonal dev. My word shouldn’t count. My last contributions were back when plasma 5 was released and at that period I was just fixing issues that affected me
Ofc it does!
I am still using that, so thank you!
The point is, if it comes from me or if it comes from someone with a Dev tag might have a different effect.
Psychology buddy…
Just point them to my post where I quote the FAQs
Here’s me hoping that the ones using Neon’s packages to help with its QA.
I know Tuxedo is willing to do it, but I’m hoping others would help as well.
A tuxedo representative responded with how they do things in the other thread you made.
They do not blindly pull from the Neon repo, they do their own testing on their own hardware only first.
I did not ask, but it sounds to me like they have their own people running the testing, again, only on THEIR hardware, not a community driven approach like KDE.
What he said is:
I’m happy to hear any other ideas and discuss possibilities for KDE and Neon to profit from.
That is not the same thing as “willing to do”.
They have tried with QA in the past but failed due to their tight scheduling it seems.
In the recent past, we tried to help with bug reports and QA for Neon as well. But honestly, we failed due to missing time and other priorities.
I think what he is saying here is they used to also make bug reports to KDE Neon, but failed due to time constraints, not that they were helping KDE Neon USERS directly. (QA vs Q&A)
It’s an interesting idea, but with that idea KDE could ALSO start working with ANY distro, Tuxedo just happens to pull from neon directly.
I agree with your first statement.
But if Ubuntu LTS or Debian is “far better” also depends on your point of view: Debian is community-driven and Ubuntu LTS is a commercial project - both has advantages and disadvantages.
To be fair: the Ubuntu HWE kernels have much more fixes than the Debian kernels from Debian Backports and Ubuntu LTS provides newer Mesa and backported firmware during its lifecycle - important for newer hardware.
OT:
Debian only provides Firefox ESR from their own repositories.
If you want Firefox you will have to get it yourself from elsewhere: Firefox - Debian Wiki
Then what is wrong with my statement?
This will be what you will have to use for the next year and a half or so.
But with this we are back at the beginning, “who is KDE Neon for”?
Should users be able to get maximum framerate in games, or should it be stable af.
Should users just be able to use a package manager and install whatever they want without jumping through hoops adding alternative mirrors?
This.
I wouldn’t rule out doing Q&A as well per se. But that would need more discussion internally and with KDE devs, at least if they would like this to be done by us.
Hardly. TUXEDO OS in a whole is built atop Ubuntu. What we’re pulling from Neon is “just” the KDE stack. So if Neon as a project would rebase onto another non-deb distribution this would cause workload on our side. Nothing severe but things to consider and work on.
Your statement is only true at this point in time. Debian Stable came out almost a year ago.
Ubuntu’s next LTS is 24.04, which will have newer packages than current Debian stable. KDE Neon will be rebased to this one around the time 24.04.1 comes out, if it does the same thing as last time when Neon was rebased from Focal to Jammy.
guess I got over-excited LOL 
Some thoughts from scanning this thread:
Some have debated whether KDE Neon should be promoted among general users, or whether it’s best suited for developers. Do we know if it is, in fact, desirable for developers in its current form? I’m reminded of comments that @ngraham made where, in his KDE role, he actually wants the opposite of what Neon claims - up-to-date core OS software versions, and…the KDE versions are irrelevant, because he’s building them locally anyway
If Nate’s situation is an outlier, and there are significant groups of KDE developers who do get value from the “old base, new KDE” model and find that it works well, then I would suggest that is the target market, as it’s uniquely serving that group - and most of that
If there are not such developers out there, though, then may I suggest that KDE Neon should reflect the KDE development philosophy? As far as I can tell, KDE generally does not operate via long-term maintenance of static feature sets - rather, it is generally more directed toward iterative improvement via more frequent & combined feature+bug fix releases.
For that reason, I would argue that pinning Neon to an LTS release for multiple years just doesn’t fit with what KDE is - and if Neon as-is isn’t serving the unique needs of a developer group, then IMO it should reflect the “KDE approach” even for the base OS - otherwise, it seems to run counter to the philosophy that KDE itself takes (i.e. if we believe rapid upstream adoption is a good thing, why do we take old versions of everyone else’s software?)
We do not.
100% agree.
But with that, 2 problems stands out to me.
With that said.
If devs actually USE KDE Neon for development, I think the whole discussion should rather be about if the NON dev users should be more clearly informed of what they actually are using, ie not a distro, rather than about moving base.
It’s clear that a major part of the issue here is the somewhat cagey messaging. I’m going to work on clarifying that on neon’s website.
I always thought it was something like Gnome OS, but actually usable
