[fChk]

This has all been super insightful as I try to rebuild the distro I was working on, from what I’ve collected is that folks value an easy to use package manager, stability and security. Does everyone like yum, apt or dnf for their package manager better?

Okay!... Back to the Basics..

A GNU/Linux system is the union of two open-source projects:
> Richard Stallman's GNU project
> Linus Torvald's Linux kernel

To make an operational OS out of those two projects, you need to build it from them; this task needs some serious competence in OS engineering and the labor of a large team of qualified system engineers. This is what Linux distributions contribute to the mix.

Originally there was 5 distros; RedHat and Debian were among them. To build and manage the thousands of the GNU project's software source code, each distribution had to build their own package manager; for RedHat it was RPM, then YUM, then DNF.

All the RedHat forks will inevitably inherit the same semantics and artifacts that the original distro use. Hence their familiarity for anyone who will use them coming from the original distro.

The problem of switching between those 5 original distros is that you're disrupting the expectations that you've come to expect of your system, having internalized the way your original distribution works.. Thus you'll be wasting a lot of time tracking down the way the new distro. is doing things (SELinux vs. AppArmor for example ...)

Each distribution of the original 5 (the rest are just forks.. meaning sugar-coating) have a well-thought-through way of approaching an Operating System from the various ways of functionality, security, performance, package management etc.. even though they are all using the same ingredients, ie. the Linux kernel and teh GNU-project's software... This is my way of saying that comparing the APT package manager versus DNF is irrelevant across distributions. People will use whatever package manager the distribution they are using HAS!