Create a page that explains what the heck distributions are

Well, there is for example a two years old but still good quote from Tim "TimOnWeb" Kamanin:

Drupal distibutions are gaining popularity. But you can ask me "Tim, what a distribution is?" Well, Drupal distribution is a custom edition of Drupal (preferably, built on latest stable version) tuned and extended with custom developed and contributed modules to enable desired features. Feel yourself confused? No problem at all, read on and you will understand what I'm talking about.

(Five Drupal Distributions. Overview)

However, probably we would need to compare specific examples of distributions vs installation profiles, to see what are the differences.

For example, distributions are more near to full-featured, almost ready to use Drupal sites, even when not completely there. On the other hand, installation profiles -which are also packaged including Drupal core- are more near to the standard Drupal download for site builders (Drupal 6, 7...).

An old related issue is #552890: Installation Profiles and Distributions

I'll take a stab at this over the next few days, and get some text back into this issue. If someone beats me to it, that's okay too :)

For some ideas, a few distribution/distro definitions.

Distro: A computer software distribution package.
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/distro

Distro: A set of software components, typically (but not necessarily) open source components, that have been packaged into a larger product or component for distribution to end-users.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/distro

Distribution: A set of bundled software components; distro.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/distribution

Distro: Software distro, a set of software components (i.e. open source components) assembled into a working whole and distributed to a user community.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distro

Software distribution: A collection of software, also referred to as a distribution, or a distro, which is set of software components built, assembled and configured so that it can be used essentially "as is" for its intended purpose. Software distribution is often the closest thing to turnkey form of free software. (...) In recent years, the term has come to refer to nearly any "finished" software (i.e. something that is more or less ready for its intended use, whether as a complete system or a component of a larger system) that is assembled primarily from open source components.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_distribution

Turnkey: Of or involving the provision of a complete product or service that is ready for immediate use.
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/turnkey

See also #1353610: Improve documentation to clarify the different meanings of "Install profile"

As bonobo suggests there, what that issue calls kickstarters (that is, installation profiles packaged with core, and sometimes one or few contributed modules), are intended for developers and site builders only, since they are not so much different from Drupal core.

A different and much more elaborate case are Drupal distributions, which require less site builder intervention because they are more near to what end-users need. That is, full-featured, almost ready to use Drupal sites.

So, we have installation profiles for site builders (or kickstarters), and distributions for end-users (almost ready to use sites, with a little help from site builders).

Can we clarify the purpose of this page? Is it just to explain what distributions are, or is also a landing page that allows people to find and filter

What would be really good is a short video that explains as well as illustrates some distributions. But at a minimum, some imagery would be great to help get the point across. I'll see what I can come up with.

In addition to the explanation on Drupal distributions, a table like the following could be included to help clarify the different types of Drupal installations that are currently available:

Two questions/comments regarding juan_g's table/breakdown in #7 -

1. Do we need to differentiate between "Generic distributions" and "Specialized distributions" ?

2. Do hosted platforms belong here? My initial (and admittedly, not fully thought out) impression is that they feel like an entirely different use case.

Well, this table includes not only distributions, but the complete list of well-known types of Drupal installations readily available, from Drupal core, through installation profiles, to SaaS hosted platforms. The reason is that, especially for new users, the whole picture helps differentiate with more clarity the different types of Drupal installations from what are usually called Drupal distributions.

General purpose distributions, like Acquia Drupal and others, are a special case. They are different from most installation profiles and much more near to distributions, but intended for site builders, with core and usually 25 or 30 contributed modules like Views, etc., essential for site building. The rest of distributions are specialized for a specific use case and, even when also very useful for site builders, at the same time almost ready for end users.

Maybe the name "Hosted platforms" is not specific enough, because of course not every hosted service is a "Drupal made easy" SaaS platform, quick and simple to use even by end users, such as Acquia's Drupal Gardens, etc. In fact, SaaS publishing platforms are really similar to distributions, but a different case.

I've corrected it to "SaaS platforms", their specific name.

At the risk of sidetracking the whole thing :)

RE: " The rest of distributions are specialized for a specific use case"

When we build an install profile, we generally ship it with a "minimal" and a "full" install - the minimal just gives the site builder some basic, frequently repeated config (things like wysiwyg editor, etc) - this is more like a Kickstart build than a distribution, but the beauty of the install profile (the process) is that one download can serve both needs.

This is where a lightweight categorization system, paired with good project descriptions and documentation, can get us farther than a more robust categorization system that might not age well.

RE Saas platforms, these still feel different than install profiles, largely because within a Saas environment, you generally can't control or access your codebase. But really, I don't feel strongly enough about that to have it hold up the real progress we've been making nailing down some of these other details.

And about the other point by bonobo, generic and specialized distributions, not sure if this granularity is ok or not here. Is this differentiation generic/specialized too specific in a explanation for new users? Should we have them together as just "distributions" for simplicity?

Sorry, cross-post. I've just read your last post.

This is where a lightweight categorization system, paired with good project descriptions and documentation, can get us farther than a more robust categorization system that might not age well.

Since this will be documentation mainly for new users, I think you are right about this.

Still, I think it's useful and clarifying for them to have, even when simplified, the whole picture of Drupal installation types, all of them related or similar to distributions.

So, more according to the categorization in these issues (distributions, installation profiles, etc.), I've merged "generic/specialized" into just "distributions" in that possible table:

RE Saas platforms, these still feel different than install profiles, largely because within a Saas environment, you generally can't control or access your codebase. But really, I don't feel strongly enough about that to have it hold up the real progress we've been making nailing down some of these other details.

About SaaS, yes, the fact that are different but similar to distributions -they are like "hosted distributions" rather than packaged- is the reason to include them in a table of the different Drupal installation types.

For example, a key concept of distributions is "Drupal ready to use". Users can ask then, are distributions like Drupal Gardens? But looking at a table, they can quickly see that there are differences.

Anyhow, a table is just one of the possible ideas to help clarify similarities and differences in this topic. If it's useful, I think we can include any simple categorization like this.

A more complete table could be the following:

So, the landing page for distributions is intended to be an easy overview for new Drupal users, not so detailed like other handbook pages.

In that case, the comparison table can be useful for now in the current docs subsection on Distributions vs Installation Profiles. Later, any editor can reorder possible new sections as needed, etc. If there is no objection, I can make it available there now or one of these days.

And about the landing page, I think lisarex and bonobo are thinking on some ideas.

+1 for adding the table to http://drupal.org/node/1089736#distributions-vs-installation-profiles

All right, done, with some small correction for accuracy.

You're complicating something even further that's complex enough already.

See #1314124-32: [META] Improve installation profile listing on Drupal.org

The need to describe distributions more effectively is pretty obvious.

Whether we call them distributions or products? Really, I don't care. But we need to define them better than they are now. End users aren't stupid; they won't run screaming from something that is clear and makes sense.

There still needs to be a way to differentiate these things for end users (not developers), and what we currently have in place is not good enough.

This is an intermediate step, not an end goal, but it will make the end goal easier to achieve over time.

Just updated names in the table of the subsection Distributions vs Installation Profiles, according to RTBC #1357806: Decide a name for user-focused distributions/products.

If it can be useful for ideas to prepare the landing page for distros, just added a section to the handbook page on additional -external- distribution documentation, with a selection of additional distribution resources (articles, lists, slides, videos).

juan_g, I'd like to nominate you as the docs coordinator for distributions: http://drupal.org/node/936522 :)

RE: "juan_g, I'd like to nominate you as the docs coordinator for distributions"

Yup! Big +1 here :)

Gulp... Very honored and humbled... Thinking about it, what happens is that the distribution topic looks like it's probably going to become a pretty greater topic than most people are aware now. Many that now say "I needed to have this work done quickly, so I used WordPress" (54.1% CMS market share, 6.6% Drupal), will later say "I needed to have this, and that, and the other work done quickly, so I used Drupal distros". That is, when customizability, extendability, and upgradability will be improved, people will start to use much more the many Drupal distributions, maybe saying "you know, Drupal distros, the WPs of Drupal, but for a lot of kinds of sites".

So, given how busy all of us are, in my opinion the distro docs coordination would be a task for at least two or three people complementing each other, like in some other doc areas. For example, I'm trying to contribute a little when I can, which is when I can get some free minutes here and there; that's why I don't use IRC. On the other hand, because of their work with distributions, lisarex and bonobo -who for example are considering ideas for the distribution landing page (#5, #2), and have already contributed documentation and good ideas- are much more qualified for this than some kind of bottom-end-user of a few distros such as myself. ;) And I and others can help them for easy tasks like I do now, when possible. What do you think?

Ok, possibly at SANDcamp's Distro Summit (Jan 25) -where webchick and many others will be- a better and more available candidate than me for docs coordination could easily appear, hopefully. ;) If not, I can try to do all I can. But as said I think this should be a task for a team, preferably people who work with distributions, like lisarex and bonobo.

RE: "possibly at SANDcamp's Distro Summit (Jan 25) -where webchick and many others will be- a better"

Not likely :)

RE: "more available"

Clearly, it's time to start working on the time space continuum distribution. I nominate juan_g to maintain that as well!

time space continuum distribution

Well, there is a module for that, or something. Although the continuum part would need an API change... =:-o

All right, we can try. Added as a documentation coordinator for distributions, and more coordinators welcome to team. :-)

Adding a documentation tag for distributions.

tagging the Distributions issues so the issue triage avoids closing this issue

Just added a short introduction for users, that of course can be improved later, to the Distributions section, in line with this issue and #1357806: Decide a name for user-focused distributions/products, #1314124: [META] Improve installation profile listing on Drupal.org.

I did a complete overhaul/edit of http://drupal.org/documentation/build/distributions , and a copy edit on http://drupal.org/node/1089736 -- I think we can mark this fixed now. Feel free to edit the pages going forward.

Ah, OK. I've re-edited both http://drupal.org/documentation/build/distributions and http://drupal.org/node/1089736 to emphasize "distributions" and de-emphasize "install profiles".

And added a couple of short details for new users to http://drupal.org/documentation/build/distributions

It seems to be ok as a start for now. However, I would propose to add a phrase about what's different about distributions, especially the full-featured ones. That is, the point colloquially mentioned as no lego work needed, out-of-the-box, etc., maybe in a more suitable phrasing for documentation.

For example, after the 1-2-3 steps Choose-Install-Configure, something similar to:

Full-featured Drupal distributions are pre-built, with their components assembled, and are ready to use with no further building steps required.

Is that all right, or another way to say it?

it might be a bit presumptuous to say that they are ready to use. I know you use the word "building steps" but I don't know that people will understand what that means. I'm not familiar with every distro, but I'm sure there's always some setup and configuration that requires Drupal knowledge, such as in COD D6 they have to know a bit about Ubercart to create an event that can be sold/signed up to.

I agree with lisarex on this one. I have never heard of a distribution that would not require *something* to be configured (the site name? some content added? etc.?). And the page already has some wording about full-featured distributions being "complete solutions".

I don't think we want to promote them as requiring no knowledge of Drupal. I mean, eventually someone is going to need to understand Drupal to maintain the site...

Of course, although I mentioned the place for that proposed place after the three steps Choose-Install-Configure of http://drupal.org/documentation/build/distributions (naturally meaning ready with no further building steps, assembling modules, etc., after those three steps), I think I would remove the "ready" part to prevent the possible user misunderstanding that you pointed out.

So, that phrase simplified and corrected for clarity, after the current three steps, could be:

With a "full-featured" distribution, you can quickly and easily set up a site for a specialized purpose such as academic, business, government, nonprofit, publishing, social, etc., in few steps:

1. Choose your Drupal distribution. You can search on the Distributions page (Download & Extend), which is all-inclusive, or use this list of several specific distributions.
2. Install it on your web server. See the Installation Guide, and specifically, the Using an installation profile section.
3. Configure it and enable the desired features from your website's Administer section. See the Administration Guide.

Full-featured Drupal distributions are pre-built, with their components already assembled, and no further building steps are required.

I still don't like that last sentence about "no further building steps are required". I think most people will still need to do some site building and configuration activities in order to build their site (choose and install a theme? add an additional module for some additional feature? configure some text somewhere? etc.). I think the rest of the page already gets across the point that distributions include a lot of other stuff pre-assembled, and I don't think we need to add a confusing sentence here that implies something that really isn't true.

Yes, that could be completed for example as "further building steps are optional and not required", or similar.

However, if you feel there is no need for the proposed phrase in that landing page for users, naturally details like those, and also on customization, extendability, etc., can be gradually added later to subsections of the documentation. I think the page we are discussing is already useful as it is, as an introduction for new users.

How about removing the last part of the sentence:

"Full-featured Drupal distributions are pre-built, with their components already assembled."

This is simple, and accurate.

Also, using just about any distribution will require some additional work/config. It's MUCH less than a from-scratch build, obviously, but every distribution will require some work prior to launch.

@bonobo: Well, about that other part, it's true that, as jhodgdon has suggested, the handbook page already explains "Distributions are full copies of Drupal that include Drupal Core, along with additional software such as themes, modules, libraries, and installation profiles." And, about the full-featured distributions: "All-inclusive products: complete solutions for specialized use cases."

So, I'm now thinking possibly they are right and details like the proposed text can be explained in other parts of the documentation. The landing page seems good now.

So, as it is, RTBC?

Let's just go straight to fixed. If someone wants to reopen, they can reopen.