Slashdot Mirror
Canonical's Troubles With the Free Software Community
puddingebola (2036796) writes "Bruce Byfield looks back at the soured relationships between Canonical and the free software community. Partly analysis, partly a review of past conflicts, the writer touches on Mir and Wayland, and what he sees as Canonical's attempts to take over projects. From the article, 'However, despite these other concerns, probably the most important single reason for the reservations about Ubuntu is its frequent attempts to assume the leadership of free software — a position that no one has ever filled, and that no one particularly wants to see filled. In its first few years, Ubuntu's influence was mostly by example. However, by 2008, Shuttleworth was promoting the idea that major projects should coordinate their release schedules. That idea was received without enthusiasm. However, it is worth noting that some of those who opposed it, like Aaron Seigo, have re-emerged as critics of Mir — another indication that personal differences are as important as the issues under discussion.'"
The second any one party becomes big enough, or popular enough, to start making meaningful changes in the way Linux is implemented in their distributions, the knives come out.
but from what I can tell, the Ubuntu style release schedule took off over-all.
And as long as things are consistent, it will have the effect Ubuntu wanted (or close too it, they basically wanted upstream to release 4 months before them, so they could integrate if memory serves).
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
Or maybe Aaron Seigo is technically competent, and thinks both are bad ideas.
... they and Shuttleworth disappeared up their own backsides in a blinding flash of self importance and inability to listen to users (Unity - the OSS version of Windows 8 Metro, need I say more). I'm afraid their We Know Best doesn't tend to adhere them to many people and I suspect they've now peaked in terms of their importance in the free software world and will slowly fade away as the years go by.
As long as they don't push changes just for the sake of pushing them...
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
Unfortunately it has spread to other distros.
Of all of stuff that has come down the road, I find systemd to be the most obnoxious invasions of the Unix religion.
Once dubbed the official version control system of GNU (partly because of Git's GPLv2-only licensing and stuff), it's been sunk into oblivion, mostly by Canonical pulling off their own workers and nobody wanting to fill the void given Canonical's assignment policies and contracts (in contrast, the FSF at least gives guarantees regarding free-only use in return for an assignment).
Now even Emacs, once the poster child for Bazaar, is organizing its transition to Git.
Here is what I think is a major concern. As Linux gains popularity, commercial companies see Ubuntu as the only package format to release software in. This is a problem for others using RPM based and Arch disrtibutions to name a few. We want a package format that is installable in ALL distiributions, not something tied to a commercial venture such as Canonical.
As an example I run an Arch based distribution and tried to install Makerware for a 3D printer. There is no generic install of that package, there are only RPM and DPKG versions and often only a repository that is more difficult to extract the package from. Further there is a license on Makerware that does not allow it to be pulled apart and repackaged. Most other players will at least provide a tar.gz file that one can install.
I see more and more Ubuntu only packages. Do we really want to go down that road? I don't think so.
'... probably the most important single reason for the reservations about Ubuntu is its frequent attempts to assume the leadership of free software ... [S]ome of those who opposed it, like Aaron Seigo, have re-emerged as critics of Mir â" another indication that personal differences are as important as the issues under discussion.'
Seeing the same critics reappear does not necessarily mean it is a personal difference. It really only indicates that the underlying disagreement remains. Mark Shuttleworth believes in centralization of authority, Open Source is implicitly about decentralization of authority. That is a difference with Mark Shuttleworth's world view; as long as he holds it, and particularly when he tries to be the central authority, he will not fit in the Open Source world. That is not personal in the sense of holding a grudge, but it won't change unless Mark genuinely embraces the decentralized nature of this method of software development.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
... I gave a chance to Unity about 3 months ago, with 12.04 LTS. I liked the desktop disposition (Mac global menu with side launcher), and the general integrated look and feel. Use of apt-get is really nice (as in Debian), and with use of PPAs I can keep almost all my software update to date in a global way. Almost all configurations are simple, which helps new users. Driver support is good (I just had to setup the hybrid graphical cards with Bumblebee). In the other side, I thought the fonts were a bit big, and I don't like the dark theme. How to text font sizes? Install third part software. How to install new themes? Install other third part software (themes is one of the most cool features of Linux DEs!). Can I change the duration of notification? Re-position launcher? No, no, only using more third part softwares. But ok, in my mind, all the problems can be fixed in the future. Then I started to look into launchpad to see the bugs opened, and the future plans. Almost all important issues related to Unity are still open, with almost no comments from Canonical (usually in KDE we have an official dsposition after few hours). Most of Canonical efforts then are focused in "convergence", which my question is "who asked for?". As the future Ubuntu phones will not use the same desktop applications, why I need a new Linux based device? I'd love if Canonical works in better integration with Android: the MTP support is a joke (stop to work after few minutes), and would be nice to attend my mobile calls with my desktop headset, read my SMS on systray, etc. I think that offer a better support for the most popular linux based mobile will be a nice flag. And then, I tested the new Ubuntu version. And I saw that I have Amazon over all the places: in desktop search, in the launcher, all activated by default. Why this? In these days of all the concerns about NSA and privacy, why not sell the "you're using an open source product with all the privacy concerns" flag? If they want financial support, why not allow users to donate, like on KDE? (I'm a KDE e.V. member). I remember too, the old Mandrake club, where users have access few days earlier than "normal" users. In my minds, it's a shame that the most talked Linux distribution has enabled, by default, a shareware scheme. And the worst: the dash search do not works well. I have avidemux installed, and if I type "demu", I got nothing. If I want to run the calculator, and I type "calc", I'll get "OpenOffice Calc" as first result. So, I mean, I can understand when Canonical choose the Unity way. Gnome team is out of this planet, removing all basic features from applications, and forcing a tablet/mobile interface too. But I cannot understand why force the shareware behavior, or other duplicate efforts, like Mir, Ubuntu mobile, etc.
Then use a real Unix if your religion matters so so much to you, personally i use what works (i have nothing neither for or against systemd - everything i do is on a higher level and it does not bother me either way)
Is this different from how Sun tried to become the defacto standard UNIX? I never cared much for their tactics, eventually they burned out too.
People don't like/want leaders. Think about presidential candidates: as soon as one stops talking about how he'll competently adminstrate, and starts going on about leadership, you start thinking, "oh well, I sure ain't gonna vote for that one." What people want, is for others to get the fuck out of the way and stop putting up obstacles. And while most leadership isn't about really creating obstacles, if you have any ideas of your own, someone else's leadership is usually going to look like that.
Sure, you can see that as a Linux "weakness." But if the community didn't have this weakness, then it would be just another Windows or Mac OS, where the dictator says how things will be, and it might even have an internal logic and not necessarily be a bad idea, and yet 99% of the users are prevented from getting what they want. And if that's your idea of strength, then you already use Windows or Mac OS.
systemd is from Red Hat. It was adopted by other distros because they believed it solved a problem, not because Red Hat tried to tell others that they must use it.
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
I think rather quickly, Linux Mint Debian Edition will rise to greater prominence, eclipsing even the Ubuntu-based Mint for the same reasons.
Interesting point on lack of business and video suites buy why blame Linux for that. When vendors look to port their apps, Windows and Mac are considered, forget Linux. For crying out loud, ever tried to use a web app like Netflix! Supported by everything but Linux. Many vendors are scared to death of Linux and open source with other vendors pushing FUD so nothing gets done. Find a way to overcome all the "haters" and may have something.
As for replacements, I agree. For personal use, other than Netflix and Turbotax, I've used Linux for years without issue. Office apps, programming, other uses, all works great. For specialized software mentioned, users will not accept an alternative even if something does exist. Sometimes their are apps, ie Gimp, Blender but not the features or polish. Other issue, try to get your boss to accept running Linux on your workstation. In many businesses, just not an option unless you are IT with a special use case. Sometimes apps other times for a host reasons, much of it FUD from commercial interests who don't want the competition.
yea the problem it solved is ensuring there will exist continued access to udev and udisks which are a hard dependency a long way up the stack now. The systemd folks are doing everything they can to make sure the udev and udisks projects end up having systemd as a dependency.
So in short no I guess nobody held a gun to any other distro maintainers heads and forced them to package systemd but its been made abundantly clear that not doing so means they will have to devote enormous resources to maintaining compatible forks of udev an udisks.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
I don't understand how that money is benefitting the OS and thereby staving off the charge of them being a technological also-ran.
Are you saying that by stockpiling that cash instead of spending it on development, Apple has avoided the developers' trap of constantly trying to make things work better, which ultimately results in dangerous technologies (like how 1930s research ultimately resulted in nuclear weapons) that perversely may lead to technological collapse (e.g. WW3), which everyone agrees is a technological downgrade (WW4 fought using sticks and stones)? And that Apple's shrewd far-seeing decision to stockpile instead of develop, is preventing a destructive singularity which could end up with us all forced by robots into abacus-labor-camps where we do their computations, and then they layer abstractions upon our manual computing and invent yet another computing infrastructure (which we cannot even perceive at our level; we're just moving little beads around), with AIs running on our abacuses, and Those AIs develop magic spells and use them to summon Yog-Sothoth (the gatekeeper and the key) That Which Sees All Time as a zero-dimensional point, and It makes it so, thereby collapsing all time into nothingness, crashing the universe? Because I agree that a crashed universe has NO TECHNOLOGY AT ALL.
Holy crap dude, that's a complicated argument you're making there. But I don't see a problem with it. I think it's sound and you may be right. Let's hold off on the accusations of them being an also-ran. Their cash may show they have found the optimum level of tech, that we must not exceed.
After the Unity GUI issues (didn't the Windows 8 One GUI to Rule Them All FUBAR show them anything?), the Mir/Wayland disputes, etc etc, I shifted over to Fedora 20 late last year and haven't looked back. I haven't had any problems finding any desktop packages I wanted to install as RPMs, and it Just Damn Works, which is why I run a Linux desktop to begin with. With the upsurge in interest in both Mint and Fedora, I think Shuttleworth/Ubuntu should be feeling a little pressure to return to the fold rather than continue pushing their own solitary agenda.
Yes, damn Canonical for not toeing the party line as set forth by the self-appointed central committee of the supreme soviet who decide what The Software should be. The whole gang of miscreants should be banished to the gulag until reeducated properly to the free market, that is to say the market fee of competitive ideas. Only then will the One True Way be realized. Until then, they are stealing bread from the mouths of our software children.
Personal differences have been the hallmark of FOSS.
That's for sure a trouble with the free software movement!
Don't like software form Canonical? Don't use it. They're a commercial company, so they have to break even ultimately. I understand if, after listening to everyone, they make their own decision. Their Mir project is all about Ubuntu phones: should that platform be successful, they'll take the merit, should they fail, the Free Software Community will still have Android as their reference platform. Even if Google is a commercial company, too, and compared to them Canonical is Candy Candy.
I can install virtually any desktop I want on a fresh Ubuntu 14.04 setup (if I have been stupid and childish enough NOT to install the derivative which ships with that very desktop already installed) in less than 5 minutes.
Now either you want an OS that gives you this freedom and you have to be OK with spending 5 minutes to make it the way you want OR you want an OS that comes exactly like you want it and can't be changed : please be my guest and make another distro.
Ubuntu offers a GREAT out of the box user experience AND can be configured to match you desktop needs in no time if you are not satisfied with defaults. nuff said.
PS: I use arch. FU. go wine somewhere else.
This is something I hate about the Linux community. Lumpy clearly spells out his issue. Also says (s)he is a Linux fan and wishes things were different.
Then you come along with a denial-based reply and not only fail to address the issue, but you find a way to deflect everything away from Linux. When Linux clearly has some role in the problem. But no, it's all FUD from other vendors and haters with mysterious intent. I guess Linux is perfect and can never be at fault, right? Unlike every other man-made system in history?
Here's a different thought. Linux practically revels in the idea of being a multi-headed hydra. All the duplicate effort, conflicting/duplicating/overlapping projects are a sort of Darwinian code throwdown. Let the best code win! And yeah, this has resulted in some pretty good outcomes. In some cases.
However it has not resulted in dominance on the desktop. The user interface is wildly disparate and distros proliferate like dandelions on an unkept lawn. Lately the thing to do for the Linux-heads is to redefine success. Linux wins because it's in phones, cars, set-top boxes, supercomputers and so forth.
Maybe this has something to do with the previously mentioned lack of good-enough video editing and accounting packages?
Here's a test, see if it sounds familiar. Perhaps you hate Microsoft/Oracle/The Man, and can recite from memory every single mistake they've made. Now apply that same standard to Linux. Can you do it or do you find yourself making excuses? For example, the KDE/Gnome v3 c-f*ck wasn't really a problem because [fill in your excuse].
Commercial vendors are top-down organizations and that makes them vulnerable to certain types of problems. Linux is mostly bottom-up organized and that makes it vulnerable to different types of problems. At a user and outcome level this can result in some startlingly similar end results. If you can't admit this then you have a problem. You just aren't clear-eyed about either yourself or Linux.
You are wrong, actually. In movie special effects, Linux is taking over as the desktop of choice, specifically CentOS. And that is because most of the tools of the trade either also run on Linux (in addition to Windows / MacOS) or exclusively run on Linux.
Admittedly this is a small niche but it *is* happening in some places. I am sure there are other niches where this is true also.