4 ms·

Because Ubuntu is trying to go mainstream, do something other free desktops/phones have not been able to do. No, other distributions have either resisted

Because Ubuntu is trying to go mainstream, do something other free desktops/phones have not been able to do. No, other distributions have either resisted proprietary code, read Fedora, or have decided to let user choose, lets say Arch Linux. There is a HUGE benefit to open source and Linux if Ubuntu succeeds. Ubuntu rarely develops for larger community. That being said. Since we don't object to ChromeOS or Android, there is no reason to blame Ubuntu. But Canonical is an enterprise with its own goals which definitely is not a truly open-source-community-project.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
slgeorge 13y ago
"Ubuntu rarely develops for larger community" I work for Canonical so I'm not un-biased. But seriously, what does this even mean? All the people in Canonical, each individual, spends all day trying to spread free software (in the form of Ubuntu) more widely. By definition every bit of Free Software developed has the opportunity to benefit the "community". I think what you mean is that sometimes a person or a company does some things that some other people (perhaps you) disagree with. It's a total strawman the idea of some singular defined "open-source-community-project" - it's not a tyranny of opinion. Every individual and company has their own goals - the beauty of Free Software is we can collaborate around our own goals but benefit the commons. Free software is about freedom, and the ability to share those freedoms - what I do doesn't impinge on your freedoms.
- fedvasu 13y ago
  please develop in upstream, push your code more upstream, be compatible with other distros when you can. co-operate with others on upstream projects like wayland, instead of going for your own way. It is your privilege to do whatever with your resources, but if you want to claim that you develop anything for "larger" community you must do the things mentioned. It is my understanding(perhaps,flawed) that canonical are trying very hard to differentiate themselves from larger linux community,which is fine if it serves well for their business, but they shouldn't act as if they are prophets of free-software.
  - slgeorge 13y ago
    Hold on, I didn't claim I was developing for a "larger" community - you need to read the comment above. Nor did I claim that I'm a "prophet of free-software" - I did say that all the people care about Free Software, perhaps you think that's fake - I can only tell you it's not. I clearly stated that each individual and company in Free Software works on areas which meet its individual goals - in other words "scratch your own itch". I do claim that this is one of the biggest benefits of Free Software because it means we can collaborate without having the same goals. And, I do believe that we are 'good citizens' of free software. We obey the rules of the license, we keep to our responsibilities. Let me put it this way. Pretend you want to work on an IRC client for Linux. And when you go online everyone screams and shouts at you and says "we've already got an IRC client we don't need more", does this stop you working on one? Of course, not because 1) maybe you have some better ideas, and 2) It's your choice what you work on. When I first got into Free Software we never had this 'tyranny of opinion' about what people should or should not develop. If I develop a feature it doesn't make you poorer in some way. It's something that's got worse in the last few years - and telling people they "don't collaborate" because you mean "your opinion is different to mine" is a bad social meme in Free Software. That's my personal opinion.
- donniezazen 13y ago
  Unity is primarily available on Ubuntu. Now Canonical has said goodbye to all derivatives to welcome Mir. You are obviously going to make an argument that it's available for free do what you want to do with it - we don't support it, we don't break your work. This is a little dishonest. You have to do what you have to do, I am not judging.
  - slgeorge 13y ago
    I seem not to need an argument since you're making one for me - though you do seem to questioning my honesty which is a bit mean :-( Nonetheless, you're right that I'm going to say that it's simply a fact that each Linux distribution develops software and puts in resources into areas that it believes fit the needs of its users. This is good, and the point of Free Software is we can all work together and collaborate without having the same goals. Let me give you some examples of this: 1. RPM - originated in RedHat, developed by SUSE 2. Real time Linux kernel patches - written by SUSE, expanded by Red Hat 3. GNOME - significant early RH (and Ximian) project, used by lots of people Unity was created by Canonical - it's available for free and any distribution can use it. Please cite an example of where another distribution could not get the code and use it - otherwise you're just blowing smoke. Factually, Canonical has not said 'goodbye' to derivatives. If you're a derivative you get free use of Ubuntu resources (build machines don't run on air by the way) and you follow the community governance model. It's up to each derivative what software it uses - that's the point - it allows each 'sub-community' to work on solutions that it cares about.
    - donniezazen 13y ago
      Irrespective of what we both think, I didn't call you, or intended for that matter, dishonest. KDE, Gnome, XFCE4, LXDE, etc. are available on all distributions but Unity is only available on Ubuntu. There is definitely something fishy here.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

slgeorge 13y ago

"Ubuntu rarely develops for larger community" I work for Canonical so I'm not un-biased. But seriously, what does this even mean? All the people in Canonical, each individual, spends all day trying to spread free software (in the form of Ubuntu) more widely. By definition every bit of Free Software developed has the opportunity to benefit the "community". I think what you mean is that sometimes a person or a company does some things that some other people (perhaps you) disagree with. It's a total strawman the idea of some singular defined "open-source-community-project" - it's not a tyranny of opinion. Every individual and company has their own goals - the beauty of Free Software is we can collaborate around our own goals but benefit the commons. Free software is about freedom, and the ability to share those freedoms - what I do doesn't impinge on your freedoms.

fedvasu 13y ago
please develop in upstream, push your code more upstream, be compatible with other distros when you can. co-operate with others on upstream projects like wayland, instead of going for your own way. It is your privilege to do whatever with your resources, but if you want to claim that you develop anything for "larger" community you must do the things mentioned. It is my understanding(perhaps,flawed) that canonical are trying very hard to differentiate themselves from larger linux community,which is fine if it serves well for their business, but they shouldn't act as if they are prophets of free-software.
- slgeorge 13y ago
  Hold on, I didn't claim I was developing for a "larger" community - you need to read the comment above. Nor did I claim that I'm a "prophet of free-software" - I did say that all the people care about Free Software, perhaps you think that's fake - I can only tell you it's not. I clearly stated that each individual and company in Free Software works on areas which meet its individual goals - in other words "scratch your own itch". I do claim that this is one of the biggest benefits of Free Software because it means we can collaborate without having the same goals. And, I do believe that we are 'good citizens' of free software. We obey the rules of the license, we keep to our responsibilities. Let me put it this way. Pretend you want to work on an IRC client for Linux. And when you go online everyone screams and shouts at you and says "we've already got an IRC client we don't need more", does this stop you working on one? Of course, not because 1) maybe you have some better ideas, and 2) It's your choice what you work on. When I first got into Free Software we never had this 'tyranny of opinion' about what people should or should not develop. If I develop a feature it doesn't make you poorer in some way. It's something that's got worse in the last few years - and telling people they "don't collaborate" because you mean "your opinion is different to mine" is a bad social meme in Free Software. That's my personal opinion.
donniezazen 13y ago
Unity is primarily available on Ubuntu. Now Canonical has said goodbye to all derivatives to welcome Mir. You are obviously going to make an argument that it's available for free do what you want to do with it - we don't support it, we don't break your work. This is a little dishonest. You have to do what you have to do, I am not judging.
- slgeorge 13y ago
  I seem not to need an argument since you're making one for me - though you do seem to questioning my honesty which is a bit mean :-( Nonetheless, you're right that I'm going to say that it's simply a fact that each Linux distribution develops software and puts in resources into areas that it believes fit the needs of its users. This is good, and the point of Free Software is we can all work together and collaborate without having the same goals. Let me give you some examples of this: 1. RPM - originated in RedHat, developed by SUSE 2. Real time Linux kernel patches - written by SUSE, expanded by Red Hat 3. GNOME - significant early RH (and Ximian) project, used by lots of people Unity was created by Canonical - it's available for free and any distribution can use it. Please cite an example of where another distribution could not get the code and use it - otherwise you're just blowing smoke. Factually, Canonical has not said 'goodbye' to derivatives. If you're a derivative you get free use of Ubuntu resources (build machines don't run on air by the way) and you follow the community governance model. It's up to each derivative what software it uses - that's the point - it allows each 'sub-community' to work on solutions that it cares about.
  - donniezazen 13y ago
    Irrespective of what we both think, I didn't call you, or intended for that matter, dishonest. KDE, Gnome, XFCE4, LXDE, etc. are available on all distributions but Unity is only available on Ubuntu. There is definitely something fishy here.