United Linux Dead

DesScorp writes "ZDnet has a story about the impending demise of United Linux, with former general manager Paula Hunter stating that 'the legal entity still exists but I turned the lights out'. While a couple of reasons were given for UL's demise, most of the blame was firmly laid on the shoulders of SCO. As a member of group, their lawsuits killed off any real product development. SCO apparently refused to resign from UL, and Hunter said that 'As long as they remained a member, it remained impossible for us to begin new projects'. Which brings up the question, couldn't the other group members have kicked them out?"

Comments

Dead?

[spezz]

Man, I hadn't even heard it was dying. Where were the early warning trolls?

Re:Dead?

[sik0fewl]

Let's see.. here it is.

Seems to be the only one.. and he was "just kidding"

Re:Dead?

[pr0c]

"Otter: TurboLinux is essentially gone, I haven't heard a peep about Connectiva in at least a year"

TurboLinux recently released TurboLinux 10 just a few months ago, they aren't gone.. they've been fairly active too.

Connectiva just recently released Conectiva Linux 10 TP2 2 days ago.

Both of these distros are not dead! They have pretty up to date packages and all!

SCO being a member of United Linux...

[corebreech]

...is like Madonna running a mirror for suprnova.org, isn't it?

Or to put it another way, why would SCO join an organization designed to standardize the way in which their IP rights are violated?

Unless of course they have no IP claims to begin with. Which they don't. And we know that. And so did SCO, at one point in time.

I don't understand why that fact alone doesn't throw this whole case out.

Slightly off topic

[jlechem]

I live in Utah and we have a little weekly paper calld the Salt Lake City Weekly. This week they had an article on the whole SCO debacle. It can be read here. Not a whole lot on the UL effort but an intereting read into the shennagings going on here. I just was reading it on lunch at work and came back to this.

SCO ploy to get "Linux Dead" in news

[Anonymous Coward]

Come on, boys, that trick is as old as the hairpiece on Darl's head.

plans for future

[Savatte]

well, if they are dead, they should open source the code.

oh wait...

Re:Maybe

[migurski]

It might have just been easier for everyone else to pull out and just reform a different group at a later time.

...Like an open source No Homers Club

The replacement is already here

[Bruce Perens]

The UserLinux project is United Linux done right. Debian base, broad membership rather than just 4 companies, equal partnership for all, nobody locked out. Please check out the planning wiki at http://userlinux.com/ . We will coordinate our release with that of Debian "Sarge".

Thanks

Bruce

HOW THE HELL IS THIS INSIGHTFUL?

[Anonymous Coward]

"SCO is bad", now mod me up assholes.

Re:Question #4 from the SCO "Linux Q & A"....

[MuParadigm]

What obligations? Paying SuSE? The UL base was pretty much created and maintained by SuSE, with the other vendors supposedly making their own "add-on" modifications. I don't think SCO/Caldera ever actually added anything, though.

Hell, SCO never even changed the name on the kernel source package, which stated pretty clearly that it came from SUSE.

Re:Alternative Group

[markhb]

I *hope* you meant that they are violating the GPL. "Violating the GNU" brings up a whole other set of connotations, some entailing a risk of contracting anthrax....