Ubuntu Announces Mir, A X.Org/Wayland Replacement

[intellivision]

You may interpret what i said however you like, but that doesn't make your interpretation even close to correct.

1st. it is quite dishonest to be insinuating that Android/ChromeOS rely on the gnu/linux stack + applications @ anywhere near the level that Canonical does. that is simply false.
2nd. It is silly for you to also not see the difference of contributions to FOSS between Canonical and Google, be that via source code, GSOC (which go look at the various projects over the years students have been paid to work on - free labor, eh?) and/or $$$ through other funding ~ such as funding code-weavers to support Adobe Photoshop in Wine, Linux foundation gold member, etc, etc.
3rd. Google's use of the linux kernel for android (and everywhere else) has put linux into the mobile game big time. (sorry Canonical coming years later and 'piggy-backing' using android s/w components is not the same thing).
4th. there is also a difference in 'stated intentions', M.Shuttleworth has always presented Canonical as sheparding/leading the larger FOSS community, he litters his speech with a zillion happy-fuzzy buzzwords, which are essentially all BS / a scam. ~ unlike Mark/Canonical, Redhat was honest from the beginning (as a good example) - they have a very commercial enterprise using FOSS software, yet are heavy contributors to FOSS projects and have been for years and years. ~ Canonical is not and likely never will be either. ~ how much code does Canonical pump into the kernel? how about compilers like GCC? ...how about anything that isn't just 'self-serving'... Google does many things that benefit a wider audience, much like Redhat does...



why are you asking a question which bears no relevance to anything? I never said someone should be shunned for not pushing changes upstream. There are sometimes valid reasons to not do so, for a variety of reasons.



the length of time really bears no relevance. Sure, Google did take a few years to adopt a more open approach to kernel development, but guess what?? ALL of the code that was commited, regardless of the time frame and who did it - was still code they wrote for the linux kernel and is in fact, their contribution (which is larger than anything Canonical has done or will do! and Ubuntu wouldn't even be running on a tablet, if google wasn't in the game)... Now sure, i can agree - it is problematic that it took such a long time and others did some of the commits - but it doesn't change the fact that google actually puts a lot of money, time, code, etc above and beyond anything Canonical does. (or will ever do). I think you also have to remember the context too - at that time, google has essentially been used to doing everything in-house, working with upstream linux kernel developers was something that was going to take time regardless.



You might want to work on that, you haven't said anything compelling. in fact, it's mostly the opposite. it seems you felt the need to drag in arguments that have nothing to do with the core issues and they were pretty weak arguments to begin with.

1st, Android, while not using the GNU stack, still leaches off the open source community while pushing its own agenda, think Google Apps and the Google certification process where you have to pay money to them in order to have access to the meat of the platform e.g. Gmail, Play Store, Google Maps etc.
Canonical pushes open source applications in their OS, Google does not.
Chrome OS however, does the same thing, except it leverages more of the GNU stack and also utilises more FOSS components such as PulseAudio, and while it does provide a FOSS platform for development (Chromium OS), Chrome in Chrome OS is closed source.

2nd, Google has a lot more money to throw around than Canonical. Much more.
To say that Canonical isn't doing its own GSoC project so they should be shamed is like saying Uganda isn't eradicating poverty in all of Africa. Any person with half a brain can see that.
Canonical does however put most of its own in house projects under copyleft open source licenses such as the LGPL. They also have fewer closed source applications out there, while Google has the aforementioned Chrome, Chrome OS and Google Apps components in Android.

3rd, I don't deny this, however Canonical was one of the first free (gratis) distributions to greatly increase Linux's scope in the desktop market. Before that, many of the solutions were either for advanced users (Debian and Slackware) or payware (Red Hat and SuSE). Android has pushed the Linux kernel into more devices, but at the same time it has also transparently made those people dependant on those closed source Google Apps and frameworks such as the Play Store.

4th, That's because Mark Shuttleworth is a marketing man. Those people's business are to sell a product to the consumer who usually is interested in only buzzwords. Most people in the Linux community probably couldn't name the Red Hat CEO off the top of their heads but they know who Mark is because of that marketing technique. It may not appeal to you, but it is an effective way to get a message across.
As for your comments on GCC and the kernel, if the tool already does exactly what you want, is there any reason to change it?

As for the other points that I have made, you haven't really addressed them besides the age old retort of 'it was going to take time anyway' even though if Google put effort into that process they could have pushed all of those patches upstream a lot sooner.

And back onto the crux of the matter, what you suggest about developers rejecting Mir patches upstream, it goes against the Linux philosophy and actually discourages choice in the ecosystem. What you are suggesting is that people should be FORCED to use either X11 or Wayland, and while you didn't say those words, it's what you are heavily alluding to.
Open Source is about the freedom of choice, it always has and always will be.
What you are suggesting is a limitation of choice, something that should be discouraged for the sake of the open source community.

[ninez]

1st, Android, while not using the GNU stack, still leaches off the open source community while pushing its own agenda, think Google Apps and the Google certification process where you have to pay money to them in order to have access to the meat of the platform e.g. Gmail, Play Store, Google Maps etc.
Canonical pushes open source applications in their OS, Google does not.
Chrome OS however, does the same thing, except it leverages more of the GNU stack and also utilises more FOSS components such as PulseAudio, and while it does provide a FOSS platform for development (Chromium OS), Chrome in Chrome OS is closed source.

Every Company has an Agenda (making money!) - at least google is honest about it. Mark/Canonical are disingenuous, every time, so it's no wonder they get blacklash. And while it is great that Canonical pushes OSS apps in their *Gnu/linux distribution*, they do little else....and in case you haven't realized it yet - Android is NOT a Gnu/linux distro and never claimed to be. ~ which is an important detail. and Unlike Canonical, they do push a lot of useful code into a bunch of projects, some of which i use everyday and are far more important than anything Canonical provides.

2nd, Google has a lot more money to throw around than Canonical. Much more.
To say that Canonical isn't doing its own GSoC project so they should be shamed is like saying Uganda isn't eradicating poverty in all of Africa. Any person with half a brain can see that.

That is so fallacious, you would have to be a complete moron to interpret what i said as this. (no offense).

I used GSoC as 1 example and was not insinuating that Canonical should be doing the same thing. But they should be contributing WAY more to upstream projects than they do, and that is a fact, especially, when you listen to all of the PR / buzzwords about FOSS, community, etc.

Canonical does however put most of its own in house projects under copyleft open source licenses such as the LGPL. They also have fewer closed source applications out there, while Google has the aforementioned Chrome, Chrome OS and Google Apps components in Android.

dummy, google is not a Gnu/linux distribution / They never claimed to be an FOSS company. I don't know where you got the idea they are ~ but you know what's funny ~ they STILL wipe the floor with Canonical in terms of contributing to many projects.

3rd, I don't deny this, however Canonical was one of the first free (gratis) distributions to greatly increase Linux's scope in the desktop market. Before that, many of the solutions were either for advanced users (Debian and Slackware) or payware (Red Hat and SuSE). Android has pushed the Linux kernel into more devices, but at the same time it has also transparently made those people dependant on those closed source Google Apps and frameworks such as the Play Store.

It's good you don't deny it, it's true again, Android is not a free (gratis) gnu/linux distribution and was never intended to be. And regardless, overall Google's various efforts (even for the 'bad' they do), out weigh what you have written above.

4th, That's because Mark Shuttleworth is a marketing man. Those people's business are to sell a product to the consumer who usually is interested in only buzzwords. Most people in the Linux community probably couldn't name the Red Hat CEO off the top of their heads but they know who Mark is because of that marketing technique. It may not appeal to you, but it is an effective way to get a message across.

Regardless, you are just making excuses for Ms/Canonical - Most users shouldn't give a crap who the CEO of RedHat is (Jim Whitehurst, btw)... but it doesn't matter - you know why? -> because RedHat is good to FOSS, they are more focused on the technology, their commitment to it (and improving it) than Canonical. I do not believe technical decisions should be left in the hands of marketers (apparently, you are quite happy with that notion though).

As for your comments on GCC and the kernel, if the tool already does exactly what you want, is there any reason to change it?

If you are going to be claiming that you are leaders/shepards in FOSS, and through around a zillion buzzwords that seem to indicate you are heavily involved in it - then fsck ya you should be heavily contributing...

As for the other points that I have made, you haven't really addressed them besides the age old retort of 'it was going to take time anyway' even though if Google put effort into that process they could have pushed all of those patches upstream a lot sooner.

that is your assumption. Adapting to an entirely different development model takes time. You may not think so, but it DOES. (and it especially does, when you've already been doing a vast amount of work, in-house before hand. I'm not sure, if you are just unaware or dumb or what? - but you can't just jump onto XYZ projects mailing lists with TONS of patches and expect they will be merged - it doesn't work that way).

And back onto the crux of the matter, what you suggest about developers rejecting Mir patches upstream, it goes against the Linux philosophy and actually discourages choice in the ecosystem. What you are suggesting is that people should be FORCED to use either X11 or Wayland, and while you didn't say those words, it's what you are heavily alluding to.
Open Source is about the freedom of choice, it always has and always will be.
What you are suggesting is a limitation of choice, something that should be discouraged for the sake of the open source community.

lololololololol. Very entertaining delusion that you have there, pretty weak too - since that wasn't what i was 'alluding' to. The vast majority of projects have been working towards moving from Xorg to Wayland (for years now), Canonical wants to add a whole lot of sh*t/headaches into the mix (by introducing yet another DS), which is just going to lead to developmental problems for those other projects that Canonical barely even contributes to in the first place. (is that fair? really?) ~ While apparently you think this is 'the way to go' - push more work onto those projects to benefit Canonical, while having no benefits to the larger community. (awesome stuff!)

I'm not suggesting 'limiting choices', I am suggesting that some of these projects take a stand against Canonical's stupidity and exploits and not support Canonical in this case, since many are already invested in Wayland... while also continuing on the path towards standardization (which Canonical isn't interested in, they don't give a crap about the larger FOSS community - so why should anyone submit to their whims ~ they shouldn't!...

Nothing would Stop Ubuntu/Canonical from maintaining out-of-tree patches (like they do in many cases already).

[shadowriver]

Unless canonical is completely out of touch with reality, Mir has probably been designed very closely with Valve, AMD and Nvidia. Since the so called SteamOS, which will most probably power the upcoming SteamBoxes is probably based on Ubuntu, if either AMD and/or Nvidia do not support ubuntu, they would be excluded from the steamboxes.

Why game console need software distribution system? Steam it self is one, they don't need Ubuntu. If steam box is trully be a truly like console, all it needs is display server (X.org or Mir) and teach big screen setting basic system settings.... or else it will be yet another branded PC, which would fail as all branded PC "consoles"

[mike4]

Reminds me of all those lonely, script kiddies at distrowatch that create distros...

For heaven's sake don't fragment Linux any further! I might even follow Miguel de iczaca and leave for osx...

[not.sure]

Every Company has an Agenda (making money!) - at least google is honest about it. Mark/Canonical are disingenuous, every time, so it's no wonder they get blacklash

Same can be said about redhat. Them taking over Linux core tech and trying to turn it into windows in order to actually do that -make money- doesn't sit well with lots of non-commercial people either.

I'd say sit back, relax, and see what happens. Modern applications are toolkit specific anyway and won't care what kind of display server they run under. So it might be nice to have a choice.

[shadowriver]

Kill it with fire, before it causes any more damage!

Creating yet another desktop shell is one thing, but fragmenting Linux's graphic stack...

I bet they won't make it. They had years to make Compiz work and they've failed. Now they want to make a display server? They are delusional.

Isnt Compiz SuSE work?

[TheBlackCat]

- Ubuntu started looking at Wayland for phone purposes, but realized their only push with closed-source drivers is toward Android compat, which Wayland can't have.

You didn't read the IRC discussion. Not only can Wayland have Android compatibility, there is already a working prototype.

- As Ubuntu played with Wayland, they had all kinds of things they wanted to change & couldn't (Ex: Server-side decorations).

First, Weston has server-side decorations, but Wayland does not. They are not the same thing. Kwin on Wayland, for example, will not have server-side decorations, according to the lead developer.

Second, Again, you didn't read the IRC discussion. All the things they thought couldn't be done in Wayland, actually could, and very easily. In fact, many of the things they thought couldn't be done in Wayland were already available in Wayland in some form. They simply failed to ask the Wayland developers whether any of the things they wanted to do could be done, and assumed wrongly they couldn't be done and no changes could be made that would allow what they want. In the end there was absolutely no valid technical reason they could come up with that would have prevented them from using Wayland, or even made Wayland worse than Mir. Also, no reason at all was given for why they didn't ask. Someone in Canonical simply told them to develop Mir. The technical stuff was all PR.

- The result: Wayland forked with all the past 2 years' skirmishes won by Ubuntu.

What have they won? Mir doesn't exist in a working form. It is pretty much all just plans, fairly vague plans for the most part.

mAnd Mir is not a fork of Wayland, it will be built entirely separately from the ground up. The Mir developers don't even know much at all about Wayland.

The software that's ran is the software that ships & has devices for it. That's 2 wins this strategy has over Wayland. And a win for open-source.

Wayland has already shipped. They are on version 1.05. Mir hasn't. It is at best a year out and that is assuming their timeline is accurate (pretty much nobody who has actually done development on a project like this believes their timelines, especially considering the complexity of some of the items on their todo list, their progress over the last 9 months, and the fact that they haven't even looked at how other groups have accomplished the same tasks). So on this count Wayland wins hands-down. They have shipped. They have other projects on board. They have an actually working system. Not complete, but at least working.

[zanny]

So on this count Wayland wins hands-down. They have shipped.

There are only 3 real ways this will end.

1. Canonical, for pretty much the first time ever, produces original complex software that works on time, and does its job well enough to hit all versions of Ubuntu in a working state (aka, not Unity in 11.04). By nature of being a corporate entity pushing adoption, and in collusion with Valve + GPU vendors, Mir sees adoption in the steambox space (in a year) and gets driver support from Nvidia / ATI / Qualcomm / etc. Mir wins, regardless of technical merit, by just having the support infrastrcture coalescing around it. Desktop Linux suffers as Canonical directs Mir to their needs and wants, closes development under the CLA, and stifles innovation in the display server space even worse than the stagnation of X for a decade caused.

2. Mir turns out like most Canonical projects as fluff, delay, and unimpressive results. The consequence is that Ubuntu as a platform suffers, mainstream adoption of GNU loses is once again kicked back a few pegs since distributors like system76 / Dell / Hp can't realistically be selling Ubuntu laptops will a defective display server and protocol, but nobody else has been pushing hard on hardware sold to consumers with any other distro (openSuse or Fedora seem like the runner up viable candidates, though). Valve probably withdraws some gaming support because of the whole fiasco, and gpu drivers don't improve at all because Mir flops and Wayland doesn't get the industry visibility it needs, and its potential is thrown into question by business since Canonical so eagerly just ignored it. The result is we are practically stuck with X for an extradited period of time since nobody is migrating to Wayland because Mir took all the momentum out of the push to drop X.

3. The best outcome is that Mir crashes and burns, Wayland is perfect by years end and can be shipping in mainstream distros, someone at Free Desktop / Red Hat gets inroads enough with AMD / Nvidia to get them to either focus entirely on the open source drivers to support Wayland (best case) or refactor their proprietary ones to work well on Wayland (and better than they do right now on X). The pressure from desktop graphics and the portability of Wayland, given Nvidia supporting it on Tegra as well, might pressure hard line ARM gpu vendors to also support Wayland. The open development and removal of the burden of X mean a new era of Linux graphics, sunshine and rainbows. Ubuntu basically crashes and burns since toolkits and drivers don't support Mir well, or at all, and Canonical being the bullheaded business it is would never consider using the open standard (hic, systemd, git).

Sadly, the second one is the most likely.

[Pallidus]

I blame this all on wayland and their snail pace development process


wayland = 5 years bs

mir = 9 months on the making, released in ubuntu 14.04

[erendorn]

I blame this all on wayland and their snail pace development process


wayland = 5 years bs

mir = 9 months on the making, released in ubuntu 14.04

I thought that ubuntu 14.04 wouldn't be available before 2014, how do you know it will have mir?