I&#x27;ll also note that Daniel has for some time not been a Debian Developer (there was some drama there, the details of which I wouldn&#x27;t want to recall even if I remembered), and &quot;Debian Live&quot; has been not an official Debian project for a while -- it&#x27;s running on live.debian.net (not .org), it&#x27;s running on servers personally run by Daniel (not by the Debian sysadmin team), etc.<p>That said, IMO the distinction of &quot;not an official Debian project&quot; is less about where the service is running (it&#x27;s a volunteer project, anyway) than about how integrated it is with the rest of Debian. For a while, Debian Live has been showing strong signs of being Daniel&#x27;s personal project -- with a lot of users, to be fair -- and not really working with other Debian teams or developers. I think that&#x27;s what came to a head here.<p>It&#x27;s been a while since I worked on this, but IIRC Ubuntu&#x27;s live image is based on Casper, which is a separate system from live-build (though live-build supports using Casper).<p>Also, bear in mind that the specific reason this happened was that there were features live-build didn&#x27;t support, like UEFI boot, that the Debian project needed. This entire kerfuffle came about because Debian wanted a <i>better</i> live boot system.