Conflicting Goals Create Tension in OSS Community
An anonymous reader writes "Mark Shuttleworth, of Ubuntu, has a post up meant to clear the air and clarify the project's place in the Debian community. He's specifically referring to comments made by Matthew Garrett earlier this month." From the post: "A little introspection is healthy, and Debian will benefit from the discussion. Matt is to be credited for his open commentary - a lesser person would simply have disengaged, quietly. I hope that Matt will in fact stay involved in Debian, either directly or through Ubuntu, because his talent and humour are both of enormous benefit to the project. I also hope that Debian developers will make better use of the work we do in Ubuntu, integrating relevant bits of it back into Debian so as to help uplift some of those other peaks - Xandros, Linspire, Maemo, Skolelinux and of course Etch."
Don't confuse debian with "The OSS Community". They are really not the same, and there is no such thing as "The OSS Community".
Conflicting Goals Create Tension in OSS Community
Yeah, anyone who's ever gotten even remotely involved in wikipedia could have seen this one coming a mile away. This is why, at work, you have "project managers", that have final say (and yet, also take the burden and responsibility of making decisions).
Push Button, Receive Bacon
So far the system has worked well for the end user.
And that is a good thing. Linux is moving along at a great pace, even with the little spats here and there. I love that there is alot of different ideas, with people to push them through.
I posted this first to Mark's blog, but I'll repeat it here:
This is a very well-written summation of the issues.
To paraphrase a comment from a message board I visit, "[Debian|Ubuntu] can't be everything to everyone."
Debian provides a wonderful base for many other distributions, not just Ubuntu, and it is a rock-solid platform for servers. It runs on many different architectures, and can be used on machines from a handheld up to a massive server. This is one of its greatest strengths, but also one of its greatest weaknesses.
Ubuntu, on the other hand, is far more focused than Debian is. Starting with the general base (the plateau, as Mark called it), it builds a strong distribution targeted to only 3-4 architectures (counting SPARC), which opens many more options. This is no different than many other distributions have done. For example, Knoppix is another version of Debian with customizations on top of it for a specific platform (or platforms).
Ubuntu can't be everything to everyone, because everyone has different needs and goals, and Ubuntu has a specific focus. Similarly, Debian can't be everything to everyone, because it is a more general distribution, a jack of all trades (and master of none).
Nuff Said.
IMHO, Gnu/Linux on the desktop still kinda sucks right now, but it is advancing rapidly. This makes me want to upgrade my distribution to get the latest and greatest, because it fixes features I really want (multimedia these days). We are quickly getting to a place where most the needs of average users will be well met. Then I won't mind if Debian is a little behind. It's like Windows XP being good enough that most people don't really care about upgrading to Vista. I can't wait until we are in that place, and I hope that then, the impedus to move forward so rapidly is lightened enough to relieve some of the stress on the Debian devs, allowing them more time to work through some of these issues.
This has got to be my settings (which seem to be just fine anyplace else) or mark shuttleworth uses a monitor 17 feet tall and six inches wide. I have never seen such a weird layed out page before. Anyone else see this skinny vision thing on the linked page?
And this, my friends is why proprietary software is vastly superior to OSS. With proprietary software there is a clear vision, and clear management structure that is able to execute on that vision, and make the tough decisions.
2006 the year of linux on the deskop? NO - to much infighting, just like this.
Whilst the subject of this post may appear to be a troll, the contents are fact.
Commercial interests are conspiring to conquer and divide OSS.
LOL
I have to say I have never found Ubuntu easier to install than Debian. (Well I guess Ubuntu has a live cd installer but for me that just takes longer. If I am going to install it, I don't need to good into a full KDE or Gnome environment to do it.)
The two opposite sides of the scale appeared in consecutive posts.
The thorough discussions apparently remove the risk of mistakes associated with conformity, called "groupspeak" by some consulting firms.
However, when all is said and done, the code for a function needs to be stable. At what point does the free-for-all become a liability?
*nix projects a somewhat splintered image. There is a group of users who are unhappy with the other two closed OS vendors, and are surveying the state of affairs. I at least am baffled trying to objectively rate all the variants out there. Does anyone know of a comprehensive feature chart that allows prospective users to scrutinize the specs for their favorite purpose across most of the builds?
We all know what MS is about. Apple's entire existence has been positioned as "the Friendly Branded OS". I have remarked that I will ease into one of the OSS builds. But which one? Red Hat? Debian? uBuntu? Xandros? When I go reseaching, who is a neutral source?
I am quite satisfied that we don't need Every Last User on OSS. There are net jokes about AOL users, and the stereotype exists for a reason. But for the midline user who wants to promote OSS, what if ALL the variants remain incomplete because of the flamewars?
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Oh wait...
Project managers do a lot more than "review submitted code/content and decide whether it should be included in the production version of the product." They drive the process, not just filter it.
For nine years I ran Debian. Then, a few people convinced me to switch to Ubuntu. For one year I used Ubuntu, and I hated it, and I switched back. Now I am back on Debian, and I love it. Then, like many people, I decided to blog about it.
Patrick "Diablo-D3" McFarland || http://AdTerrasPerAspera.com
I would say that the line, "Ubuntu could not exist without Debian," is not an opinion. It is fact. Does this mean that Ubuntu owes anything to Debian? Not really. Other than the GPL obligations, there really isn't anything that Debian could or should ask for in return from Ubuntu.
Anybody who has worked with Debian already should have a deep and profound respect for the fact that Debian is plain and broad. When you sit down at a Debian computer, you are seated before a gateway to what might be the most customizable distribution in existence. All of the packages are roughly as far away as "$ sudo aptitude", and it is all but guaranteed that no matter how complicated or convoluted the package you want is, it will be downloaded and installed, along with dependencies, and you don't have to worry about a damn thing. (If you've ever compiled your own VLC or GIMP, you know what I'm talking about.)
The problem is that people would like to see specialization in Debian. Debian is not for specialization. It's for everybody to make what they want. Taking that away from Debian compromises the entire goal of the project...
~ C.
You take a straightforward, uncontroversial statement (Shuttleworth's blog entry) that practically everyone agrees with. Then you publish a headline saying there's a "conflict", and pretend there's a huge row going on.
Pretty soon you've got a heated argument going on, mostly between people who haven't read the statement that allegedly started it all.
What does it all prove? That Slashdot isn't "stuff that matters" any more, it's stuff that draws mass readership. Just what we were trying to get away from when we first started reading Slashdot ...
http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2006/August/os.php
OS Stats
Tue Aug 1 00:01:02 2006 - Thu Aug 31 23:58:00 2006 31.0 Days
1. Windows XP 97428486 (82%)
2. Win 2000 9007785 (7%)
3. Win 98 5287418 (4%)
4. Mac 3867642 (3%)
5. Unknown 1852643 (1%)
6. Linux 485138 (0%)
7. Win NT 338596 (0%)
8. Win 95 234157 (0%)
9. Win 3.x 166530 (0%)
10. Unix 93793 (0%)
11. WebTV 30425 (0%)
12. Windows ME 6217 (0%)
13. OS/2 1567 (0%)
14. Amiga 333 (0%)
Those that think Linux has, is, or soon will, make inroads on the desktop -- pft!
So, you're bitter about an intelligently written blog post which serves as a brilliant attempt to reconcile tension between two of the larger communities in linux because on another blog post he offended your distro? Grow up.
The main point which is also the main flaw of the product he is trying to sell is this sentence:
You could only perceive that as an outcome if you assumed that the two have exactly the same goals.
So he said it, you can't come back later and say he didnt warn you.
Then he takes extra care not talking about it anymore and try to sell his product: HIS vision of the situation.
Dear debian people, be happy with your rules, with your development version,hack things, and let me take care of the current version.
And of course, of the business.
The problem is that it is quite possible and even obvious that personal goals of many members of the community, or users of debian could be exactly the same than ubuntu's , that they first saw ubuntu as a way to reach those goals and they now understand that thay are not only competing for them but even helping ubuntu reaching them first hand when ubuntu profits from debian's development and not the other way around and when developpers are sucked in.
In which case, one of them will succeed and the other fail. Don't say then he didnt warn you now. Well, I did.
The moral of all this is that to make the front page of /. it's better to have a conflict (which are unavoidable with any project the size of Debian) than to have thousands of hours of hard work.
--Go Debian!
First of all... googling "Linux Distros" I got this page
http://lcic.org/distros.html
which not only has information on distros but links to helpful sites such as distrowatch which do exactly what you say, list the features of nearly all of the linux distro's out there. Dude, don't complain it's not there without even looking.
Second, they are all incomplete, and always will be. None of the distro's is right for you, and never will be. Once you start really using a tool, it's never QUITE right, it's always got some little thing you want to be different. The biggest thing differentiating the distro's is in fact exactly this, ease of configurability for the 100% computer geek in trade for easy of discoverability/usability for the part time user. How to do both is a difficult question, and the many linux distro's pick somewhere in between. The number of distro's merely reflects this fact of life. I personally HATE having some user friendly thing try and guess and my device drivers, because 2 days later I'll decide that I don't like the driver they chose for that card or need a weird unstable feature and have compile my own kernel anyway. Why deal with card detection which by it's very nature guaranteed to not be 100% stable? Debian is at the admin level of control, enough control for any web/sys admin, but difficult to use for the desktop environment. Being used by this class of control freek yet practical people with things to get done has made it one of the best distro's out there. It has the best package management to this day, the largest archive, runs on the most archs, and is arguably the easiest of the major distros to secure. As a result it's a wonderful baseline for Ubuntu: a userfriendly desktop distro that doesn't show you boot up information, and makes you go through the silly simon says sudo dance to do root operations without a password. It's a wonderful distro for the normal user (read, not me).
TFA states that Debian can't be everything to everybody, this may be true now, but we don't know if it actually can eventually. Linux was a crappy as hell desktop kernel, now it runs XEN, or on a multibox NUMA system, or can be fully preemtable for graphics, or it can run on your pocket watch without even an MMU. The kernel is doing it, Linux is becoming everything (except admitadly, stable). The fighting in debian means that no-one debeloper takes it and runs with it, off into there own little la-la land and it continues to be useful for everyone. As everyone pulls in every direction at once, Debian may break. But if it doesn't, as it stretches people fill in the slowly growing holes in the middle, the fabric will only get stronger, the code more stable, as people do more and more rediculas things with the same codebase. Gentoo's strongest point to me is that it's a source distro, and in essence supplies an easy way for people to horribly break their computer systems. This causes code to get fixed, Gentoo packages compile with O3 and horrific cflags, because people ask them too. The same sort of strain on Debian's codebase can be good for it. As it stands debian actually does something similar via ports to other archs. I think the same can hold true in general "ports" to different goals. Pulling can be good, it makes for configurability, and that's good for a distro like debian. Let Ubuntu package the results up, and hide it all for the normal user (pulling in fact in that direction, and yet again improving the source base as a result).
If what you were saying about games being the only thing holding linux back was true then linux would rule the business desk-top. It does not.
Every major linux app is a poor rip off on it's windows counterpart. Take Open Office - much slower, has less features and crashes more often then MSWord. Why on earth would anyone want to go though that pain, when for $300 they can have the absolute best office suite?
$300 is nothing compared to that pain that is OO.
BTW - your reply (above) was the second time you have taken my one of my trolls in the same article. The fun part about the linux sucks trolls is that they are true..
These divisions simply do not exist. Ubuntu is another sign that free software is advancing, and that non-free junk will just fall by the wayside. M$ obviously doesn't want this, they know their business model is failing, so they're plunging money into astroturfing to make OSS look divided. They've done it before and they'll do it again. Everyone knows Vi$ta will fail.
Friends don't help friends install MS junk.
What I want out of Linux:
1.One GUI.
2. Ability to play DirectX games.
3. Double click driver and application installs. "Fire and forget"
4. No preaching. I don't really give a rat's ass about what is free and what isn't. I care about things that work and have minimum user input to make them work. The days of $500 printer drivers have been replaced with $75/hour Linux distro experts.
5. Uniformity in how things work. This should be #1, but it's late. Currently, Google is the #1 tool that Linux admins use for tracking down errors. Why?
There is a uniformity that exists with windows that linux lacks.
Ubuntu...all the others. Of them all, SUSE has a clue.
I will be *retired* long before Linux gets a grip...if it ever does.
So install it using the Failsafe (I think that is the term) option. It boots into an ncurses menu program, just like Debian.
---- "XML is like violence. If it doesn't fix the problem, you aren't using enough."
I read the blog post (yes, I know reading the actual articles is unusual for Slashdot, I'm sorry), and as I see it Shuttleworth's point is mostly that Debian should focus on the work on the unstable branch because, plainly, that's what working best.
Maybe he's right. Debian's never been succesful at meeting the scheduled release dates. If Ubuntu is capable of delivering better desktop releases, and in soon perhaps also better server releases, then what's the point of struggling and perpertually flamewaring to do the same inside Debian? Food for thought. Maybe a Debian developer would like to comment on that?
By the way, he openly admits that the unstable branch is vital for Ubuntu which could explain why he thinks that it is better to focus on it.
Personally, I recommend Ubuntu 6.06. I myself recently switched over to it, and have found it to be a very pleasant experiance. I even managed to convince a friend that he should totally switch after, within the space of about 20 minutes, everything "worked." Unlike in previous distos, he was able to get 3d acceleration working properly, dvd+MP3+Other Proprietary codecs, ut2k4, and he just loves the simplicity of apt-get and synaptic. Immediatly before running Ubuntu, he tried running openSUSE, which didn't quite work out for him (couldn't get anything to simply "work"). After 3 days, he removed openSUSE.
Truth be told, I don't think your going to be able to find a Neutral Source. Really, the closest you are going to get to a source you consider Neutral would be yourself. As for a feauter chart, however, that is a bit easier. Wikipedia has one here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Linux_d istributions
As far as the debate on the semantics of Mark's post are concerned, I think that it is laughable that the discussion is even taking place. If anyone actually read and understood it, they would see how comical it is that they are arguing over the semantics.
The main - and subtlely articulated - point that I gathered from this:
Shuttleworth is ackowledging that many of the Ubuntu users/booster club members are thinking out of their ass. Cruise over to the Uubuntu forums (or any of the unbearable "I just installed Ubuntu" threads on Digg) and you'll see a blatant ignorance of Debian. Not of its existence necessarily, but of Debian's immense role in the Linux world for all of these years. Mark knows it, the Slackware folks know it (but don't want to deal with those sysv scripts), but the "my laptop spins like a floating cube with Ubuntu" crowd don't always get. And their brash attitude is a bit of an embarrassment.
Just makes the meme pool that much larger to draw from I suppose
openSUSE is the project I want to love, but so far can't. I think if it were the same as the Enterprise version, then I would love it. But since I couldn't get YaST to do almost anything I had to drop it, and now love the Ubuntu set up I have with XGL, Compiz, and Slab. I think one of the most important factors in Ubutuntu is its active forums filled with hacks, scripts, and help.
Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
That worked perfectly on that page, looks normal and readable now. Before it had like two words per line and an endless scroll to try and read it.
It is not only games, but also not the applications that drive the bussiness desktop today. There's no argument that MS Office suite is more stable than OO.o. On feature-wise though who can argue that OOo is not sufficient for bussiness office needs? The problem with bussiness is support. MS had used vast majority of its resources (at least in past) for this area. And with the name they got from consumer market they had good penetration to bussiness market. And games was a big part of consumer market. If MS was not strong on consumer market, they would not release Windows XP, at least with that much end-user enhancement to Windows 2000.
To be successful in bussiness you need commercial support, and only last couple of years brought that to Linux. RedHat and Novell are doing this, and Cannonical will do that as well. So that bussinesses will rely on Linux because they know that they will have commercial support if they need (and they actually need).
MS has the great advantage of first comer to GUI Workstation for mass deployment. They backed this with pre-installs of bussiness choice of hardware suppliers, like Dell and HP. And Boom!.
Not to mention turf was empty for them *for a while*. It's only matter of time and competition that will get their monopoly in that market, and once you have no monopoly there will be more standarized environment for everyone which means a good advantage to Linux as it's not only liberal but also free.
Mark Shuttleworth is not in a position to tell other projects how to manage a project without conflicts. I recall that just before the Dapper release some German Kubuntu developers threatened to leave the project because Canonical refused to communicate with them. One of these rebelling German guys was the main developer of K/Ubuntu's new live-cd.
Part of the problem seemed to be that these Kubuntu developers were not paid employees. There was one paid employee in the lead of the Kubuntu project and this employee did his best trying to convince people that there was no conflict, although obviously there was. Hiding problems and denying conflicts seems to be the official policy of Mark Shuttleworth's pet project and this carefully built image of easy success that they want to project to the public makes Shuttleworth now think that he can advise other projects about their goals.
"Let he who is without sin throw the first stone," but Mark Shuttleworth is not as innocent as he'd like to appear. He has faced conflicts in managing his own project and I'm not at all sure that he's the right man to tell other projects how to avoid conflicts. And advising Debian to concentrate its efforts on improving Sid is definitely a bad advice, although such decision would certainly suit Ubuntu that is built upon snapshots of Sid.
You can post here, moderate, submit news,
Actually you can't submit news, or rather you can submit it, but it will be ignored. You can only post replies to news.
Er, yes, Mark Shuttlework used to be a Debian developer back in the early 90s, before he made his millions. Why do you think he chose to base Ubuntu off Debian in the first place?
Two Vs do not make a W. The above is a troll account designed to annoy Twitter.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
How much does Bill pay you then? I suppose unlike all the others on M$'s payroll, you had the bravery to log in.
Friends don't help friends install MS junk.
What's wrong with a little tension? It's all about how you handle the tension.
It really seems to me that Ubuntu really is more of a community than a just a distro. Packages appear to be carefully selected based on what the community is asking for, and the effect of the community forums for support make it a great distro for the newbie (be nice to the newbie! when properly nurtured, they can grow into gurus!).
I think that if Debian total fell apart for any reason, Ubuntu would continue to move forward. If the community found another distro to serve as a base, I think they would just use that base.
It's all about community, the people. Without that, software really doesn't matter much.
"The large print giveth, and the small print taketh away" -- "Step Right Up", Tom Waits
It is a Beta. It will be nice when it is released but shouldn't compare apples to apples.
This is one of the problems with Debian. Stable while very stable tends to be lag every other distro. Heck most people I know use the testing and often unstable.
I don't call beta software a recent version. I call it a future version.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Hmmmm....what you have in most projects are:
* Brilliant Talent. The same brilliant talent may be completely disorganised and hence requires a helping hand. Sometimes great thinkers and sometimes great ideas.
* Supporters. Early adopters, like-minded individuals.
* Acumen - Usually in business. Hole plugging, streamlining, organisational and communication skills.
Even the "OSS Community" is fickle. Sometimes it is just stubborn and sometimes it is the old-dog that won't learn the new trick. You get out of it what you put in.
Arguments (Debates) are good - flaming though....welllll, sometimes someone needs a good slap sometimes.
I can only repeat what I've already said for NetBSD (see http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=195449&c id=16013982), leadership is the key point of the success/failure of a project. Debian and Ubuntu are two extremes of leadership, while Debian none leaders most probably will fail the outcome of Ubuntu isn't clear. Mark has all the powers of a dictator, lets see if he's able to circumvent the threads this imposes.
O. Wyss
See http://wyoguide.sf.net/papers/Cross-platform.html
I have a conspiracy theory, Ubuntu and some other distros are part of M$ embrace and extend...
be wary of any "OSS" distro with hidden shit in it. I'm just saying! FLIPPIN IDIOT!! GOSH!!!
what say the smarter people than I? I may be crazy but at least I'm fckn crazy!
So much drama in the OSS, coincedentally vista can't make it out the door, it's msoft voo doo I tell u!