Canonical Posts 15 Mesa Patches To Support Mir

[dh04000]

But the patch #15 should be rejected XD.

Then people should work with them and change it so patch#15 doesn't negatively affect x and wayland. Rejecting to collobarate and saying hey "this is how you could fix it", or two entirely different things.

[LinuxGamer]

Isn't BO$$ a Windows Guy??? ...which i am *NOT* at all.

My comment that you quoted was a reflection of reality, all previous attempts (including Canonical's) have been failures. That isn't to say, Linux won't be successful eventually on the Desktop (obviously, i want it to be), but it's my personal belief that we aren't there yet. ~ which i think is fair to note/say... and that doesn't make me BO$$ for pointing that out <it does make you a child for going that way though>. So if you actually have something intelligent and relevant to say <which your above comment is neither> than by all means - enlighten me...

Wayland isn't the only determining factor, either ~ So i am not sure why you are proclaiming that it is? <explain in detail?>

...because from where i am sitting, while Wayland is very important - there are lots of common problems that face end-users which have nothing to do with xorg(or potentially Wayland or Mir). So (for you) to claim Wayland is the solution, just seems silly to me. I'm curious, have you even used Wayland, and if so ~ how did your experience with Wayland convince you it was an MS killer?

Wayland is Fixing most of are problems in the Desktop space thats what we needed for so long to go Full Mainline
i was calling alexThunder BO$$ them 2 are twin's
on top of that all the Development for Wayland is mosty the same on Desktop's or Phone's
it has good Multiseat support etc the perfect frames is a seller too
Wayland and systemd get along fixxing even more Desktop space problems
but now we have that thing called Mir adding in even more tool kits and problems
Really our Main Problems are Jerk's like Canonical They're whats going to End up Holding Linux back a few Years do to dis Mir Thing and they're the few who have the cash to do the PR on a main Line Linux Desktop but Building there own DS over using wayland is beyond me it's going to really showing down Project's Developers Hate Multi Platform and now Developers are going to look at Linux and Say Pass
adding a new Multi Platform is what they're going and it's only going to end up bad for all of us

[ninez]

Not exactly. They shouldn't lower their standards but instead help Canonical improving their patches to a suitable quality instead of fighting them. I know, this is asked for too much, but at the end, the overall benefit would outweight the question of who's actually right.

that sounds an awful bit like saying the ends justify the means, to me.

Have you ever tried to contribute patches to any project before??? ....i'm guessing not and that you aren't familiar with this kind of thing - in any personal meaningful way - this poses a problem for you commenting on how XYZ project should in regards to contributions. Canonical like any other contributor to a project should pull their own weight. It is upto them to make revisions and push until their patches are accepted.... Sure, a developer can give them pointers, but beyond that ~ it's their (Canonical's) responsibility to make their code meet whatever expectation a project has....

I'm sorry, but you trying to say (whether you acknowledge/see it or not) that Canonical should be treated differently than other contributors.

Yes, and they're in competition with who? They're not seriously competing with other Linux distros, as they're still a minority/niche. They're aiming for the masses, i.e. Google, MS, Apple. I really don't see Canonical's business modell threatend by other Linux distros

Canonical currently is in competition with the larger FOSS linux community, you're right though, Canonical's business model isn't threatened by other linux distros - but things like their CLA - are a threat to the GPL and FOSS in general, as one example.... Allowing 1 shady company (like Canonical) to be in control of a critical components like a Display server, for example - is a threat to the larger community...

Ubuntu is niche, like every other distro - Ubuntu isn't competition for MS or even Apple.

Is that, what they're selling directly to end users?

Arguably, they offer Windows to most end-users. Ubuntu is an option for _some_ models, in _some_ regions... they also offer the XPS 13 developers addition ~ which is clearly aimed at technical users, not (non-technical) end-users... Again, Ubuntu is not a huge part of DELL's market.... and you're claimed they only support Ubuntu is BS - since as i already pointed out, i can use any other supported flavor of linux and even get help with unsupported flavors via Dell's Mailing lists..

I know of Microsoft's dirty tricks, but, well, that's marketing. I wonder how you'd want to beat that without someone doing the marketing for Linux. Technically, the Linux Desktop is in a good shape - it could be better, granted, but for a lots of users (maybe even for the majority?), the desktop is sufficient as it is right now (which practically is: browsing, mails and some office stuff). Still, if no one is ~selling~ that, how should it spread among the masses? They won't adapt to that themselves out of nowhere. You may wait forever to see that happening.

Marketing had very to do with MS becoming dominant in the PC market. I'm not sure why you are claiming you know all about MS's dirty tricks (or even history) to then go on to say "well, that's marketing".... no dude, it wasn't marketing. It was secret deals, backstabbing, etc :\ Marketing has played a part - but it had little to do with MS' domination. ~ I guess you weren't alive (or too young to remember) the PC market in those days... "Technically" ~ The linux Desktop is in *okay* shape - but i disagree that it is even good enough for most users, and certainly not the majority (of non-technical users). It may be fine, assuming they have a linux-friend who can help fix problems as they arise, but without that, or some technical leanings of their own...no. I don't think so. ~ It's also very unlikely (because of how entrenched MS is in business/offices) that many of these users would be able to switch to Ubuntu (or any other linux flavor) without a linux port of MSOffice. ~ Since, more often than not; people may need to do work from home / interoperability between work/home computers/applications.

people are slow to change, yes - but they aren't just going to switch to Ubuntu because it is available, either... Frankly, the fact that Canonical markets Ubuntu is no reason for me to put support behind them (nor should it be for anyone else, on that alone), especially with Canonical's track record...I'm sorry, that may be good enough for you - but i don't want another Microsoft, which is the direction Canonical is going, whether you see it or not.

A lot of people? What do you mean by that? another 0.5%? It won't be much more. Note, that most people don't even know what Linux is. Just because there's a super duper distro somewhere on the net won't make them ditch the OS they already have and know for something they're completely new to. Especially not, if they're not even capable of setting anything up, which goes beyond downloading something from an App Store.

You really assume too much of the average users. The majority won't do anything on their own instead of using what other people already have set up for them.

...or you need to learn how to read, before responding...lol What i was saying, is that at the point when XYZ distro works OOTB for almost anyone (ie: not technical users, who just expect things to work). ie: little to ZERO setup involved - Desktop Linux will likely become popular, just as it has in other markets.... it doesn't require that everyone knows what Linux is, either ~ it requires that XYZ distro could (in good conscience) be recommended for people to use (by people who do know what linux is)....

I work in the IT industry, and i can tell you right now - i would never recommend ANY linux distro - *including Ubuntu* to the so-called "masses" of non-techy users. We aren't there yet - and marketing isn't going to get us there, since it doesn't address the core problems...

it seems like you completely missed my point. I know a ton of people who would use something other than Windows ~ especially, something free, *IF* it was good enough - but i can't in good faith recommend Gnu/Linux to them because contrary to what you say, Linux isn't "in good shape", in that way...

Small correction: "if canonical fails, who will bring Ubuntu to the masses?" it'd rather be: "if canonical fails, who will bring Linux Desktop to the masses?". You're right, buzzwords alone won't help that much, a mature technology is required. But history of (technological) bestsellers clearly shows, that quality of the products is barely related to it's success. Sure, it's hard to sell total garbage, but if your stuff somewhat works and you have by far the better marketing, you'll win the race. That's not a surprise, since people generally don't know that much about what they're using - they can hardly determine, which product actually is the better one. If it's really the better product selling the most units, that's a coincidence :P

Linux is on the path to winning the whole pie, anyway. The desktop is essentially the last country to conquer. And this situation is different than MS / Apple.. ~ they run are/run their own eco-system, Canonical/Ubuntu does NOT - most of which Canonical/Ubuntu has very little to do with in terms of direction, decision-making and driving development. RedHat for example does much more than Canonical ever will. ~ that is why i say you are naive to think they aren't intentionally isolating themselves, they need more control of their software to pull anything off.... It's cool if you are happy using Ubuntu and would prefer to have a repeat of MS all over again. (Canonical = MS - more concerned with dominance than making quality products)...

Furthermore, Linux (or Ubuntu at least) won't take over the Desktop so soon, that's probably right. However, it's influence is increasing. Within a year, we got support from the Unity Engine, which will results in a lot of indie games for Linux. Beyond that, we also have a huge support among Crowdfunded games (mostly indies, mostly of them due to Unity, but also AAA, see Star Citizen - not yet confirmed, but you may have heard of Crytek's Linux plans ) and Valve going serious about Linux. Sure, that would have been possible without Canonical, but would it have been likely? You may argue about this, but just look at which distro they're focusing and why (see the slides on Linux provided by The Farm 51 if you want an answer).

You do know that not every average computer user gives a crap about games, knows what Unity Engine is, or even about Valve, right?

I think you have drank the Ubuntu kool-aid to buy into this stuff.... I wonder what made Valve more serious about Linux - Not liking Micorsoft <who is now sort of their competition in some ways / Gabe hating Win8 interface or was it Ubuntu, more specifically??? I'm guessing the 1st two && the fact that Linux these days is a much more stable, reliable kernel than it ever used to be and that Desktop linux has also improved likewise... which goes back to my original comment about "maturity", not "code quality" as you thought i was saying.

[alexThunder]

that sounds an awful bit like saying the ends justify the means, to me.

Yes, you got me right this time. I know, it's an awful bit (I said, that's asked for far too much). If people in charge also see it this way, we're stuck. They can very well blame Canonical for that and they'd be right, still the issued would remain unsolved. Not good for anyone, I think. But I'd like to make it clear again, that I certainly won't blame the people who ignore or fight Canonical for a good reason - I just don't like that, though.

And again, I still agree, that's actually up to Canonical to hand in better patches. But until now, the guys from Mesa didn't comment on why Canonicals patches were not accepted, did they? (Yes, this is actually a question)

Btw. "the ends justify the means" seems to be formulated a little harsh, don't you think? To me it sounds like people get seriously hurt )

Canonical currently is in competition with the larger FOSS linux community, you're right though, Canonical's business model isn't threatened by other linux distros - but things like their CLA - are a threat to the GPL and FOSS in general, as one example.... Allowing 1 shady company (like Canonical) to be in control of a critical components like a Display server, for example - is a threat to the larger community...

I'd like to point you at RMS justification of the "selling exception". This isn't exactly the same here, but it comes close (enough).

Ubuntu is niche, like every other distro - Ubuntu isn't competition for MS or even Apple.

Nope, not yet, but that there's some development ongoing. It'd be a shame if in the future only Canonical would benefit from that, because of things like Mir (which could be solved - even afterwards).

Arguably, they offer Windows to most end-users. Ubuntu is an option for _some_ models, in _some_ regions... they also offer the XPS 13 developers addition ~ which is clearly aimed at technical users, not (non-technical) end-users... Again, Ubuntu is not a huge part of DELL's market.... and you're claimed they only support Ubuntu is BS - since as i already pointed out, i can use any other supported flavor of linux and even get help with unsupported flavors via Dell's Mailing lists..

Yes, that was BS, I'm sorry. I was actually only thinking of machines directly sold to end users - I should have made this clear - my bad I know, that Ubuntu is not a very big part of Dells business, but it still is: http://blog.canonical.com/2011/10/27...ores-in-china/

They don't do that with other distros, do they?

Marketing had very to do with MS becoming dominant in the PC market. I'm not sure why you are claiming you know all about MS's dirty tricks (or even history) to then go on to say "well, that's marketing".... no dude, it wasn't marketing. It was secret deals, backstabbing, etc :\ Marketing has played a part - but it had little to do with MS' domination. ~ I guess you weren't alive (or too young to remember) the PC market in those days... "Technically" ~ The linux Desktop is in *okay* shape - but i disagree that it is even good enough for most users, and certainly not the majority (of non-technical users). It may be fine, assuming they have a linux-friend who can help fix problems as they arise, but without that, or some technical leanings of their own...no. I don't think so. ~ It's also very unlikely (because of how entrenched MS is in business/offices) that many of these users would be able to switch to Ubuntu (or any other linux flavor) without a linux port of MSOffice. ~ Since, more often than not; people may need to do work from home / interoperability between work/home computers/applications.

1) Hm, may I ask you, what you think "marketing" actually is? It actually means, steering the market towards your needs - that does not exclude dirty tricks. It's more than just commercials.

2) The shape of the Linux Desktop - I'll comment on this later on this post.

people are slow to change, yes - but they aren't just going to switch to Ubuntu because it is available, either... Frankly, the fact that Canonical markets Ubuntu is no reason for me to put support behind them (nor should it be for anyone else, on that alone), especially with Canonical's track record...I'm sorry, that may be good enough for you - but i don't want another Microsoft, which is the direction Canonical is going, whether you see it or not.

I actually agree here, but the problem is, that people will follow Canonical, if their marketing works - no matter if you or me like that. (I feel that I should recall my attitude towards Canonical here: I don't love them, but right now they seem to be the only way out of MS/Apples grip in the long term - right now I'm concerned, whether this still will turn out to be good or not - I want to see Linux as an alternative, not only Ubuntu).

...or you need to learn how to read, before responding...lol What i was saying, is that at the point when XYZ distro works OOTB for almost anyone (ie: not technical users, who just expect things to work). ie: little to ZERO setup involved - Desktop Linux will likely become popular, just as it has in other markets.... it doesn't require that everyone knows what Linux is, either ~ it requires that XYZ distro could (in good conscience) be recommended for people to use (by people who do know what linux is)....

I work in the IT industry, and i can tell you right now - i would never recommend ANY linux distro - *including Ubuntu* to the so-called "masses" of non-techy users. We aren't there yet - and marketing isn't going to get us there, since it doesn't address the core problems...

it seems like you completely missed my point. I know a ton of people who would use something other than Windows ~ especially, something free, *IF* it was good enough - but i can't in good faith recommend Gnu/Linux to them because contrary to what you say, Linux isn't "in good shape", in that way...

In my experience, most people are helpless either way if they encounter a problem. They can't fix things neither on Windows nor on Ubuntu. They always need other people to help them - some of them are lucky to have tech-savy friends, others just ask the next pc-store for help.

I migrated a bunch of people from Windows to Ubuntu and received significantly less calls for help since then (started with 10.04). These people are friends, family members or teachers at my university (not from the cs department - Ubuntu is already widespread there).

I recommend Ubuntu as long their ability to interoperate isn't limited (e.g. some of them desperately need MS Office - sometimes they're fine running Windows with that in a VM, but that's usually not what I recommend).

That leads me to the conclusion, that Linux Desktop (at least Ubuntu) is in a good shape for some of the average users, maybe even for the majority (?). Surely not for everyone - by far not, but for quite a bunch I think.

Linux is on the path to winning the whole pie, anyway. The desktop is essentially the last country to conquer. And this situation is different than MS / Apple.. ~ they run are/run their own eco-system, Canonical/Ubuntu does NOT - most of which Canonical/Ubuntu has very little to do with in terms of direction, decision-making and driving development. RedHat for example does much more than Canonical ever will. ~ that is why i say you are naive to think they aren't intentionally isolating themselves, they need more control of their software to pull anything off.... It's cool if you are happy using Ubuntu and would prefer to have a repeat of MS all over again. (Canonical = MS - more concerned with marketing than quality)...

I noticed, that Canonical wants control over their stuff, but this isn't (necessarily) the same as isolating themselves. For instance, an employee of Canonical offered to work on KDE for Mir ( http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTM5MTE ), but was rejected by KDE devs.

Btw. "more concerned with marketing than quality" - Although I don't think, it's that bad, I wouldn't object to this, but to this: "Canonical = MS". I know, you're referring to quality vs. marketing, but still I'd be careful to write it this way.

You do know that not every average computer user gives a crap about games, knows what Unity Engine is, or even about Valve, right?

I think you have drank the Ubuntu kool-aid to buy into this stuff.... I wonder what made Valve more serious about Linux - Not liking Micorsoft <who is now sort of their competition in some ways / Gabe hating Win8 interface or was it Ubuntu, more specifically??? I'm guessing the 1st two && the fact that Linux these days is a much more stable, reliable kernel than it ever used to be and that Desktop linux has also improved likewise... which goes back to my original comment about "maturity", not "code quality" as you thought i was saying.

I guess it's a good portion of both. I agree on what you're saying, but I'd add, that Ubuntu made Linux (kind of) end user-ready. Without that, I guess, Valve would still not be on Linux land.

And of course, you're right, that most average users don't care for games. However, gamers (as audience) usually sit between: they're not kernel hackers, sure, but usually they're still more capable of using a computer, than the average. Linux is currently entering that market and we're seeing success. Of course, there's still a loooong way to go, but hey - it's something

[phoen1x]

f*** outta here

but that there's some development ongoing

Get lost you stupid troll. Seriously what a joke, are you sick or what? Canonicals fail unity is what competes with apple's osx? You gotta be drinking very old milk.
PLEASE CAN YOU COMPREHEND SIMPLE THINGS:
Linux kernel is NOT developed by Canonical.
GNOME is NOT developed by Canonical.
KDE is NOT developed by Canonical.
Xorg is NOT developed by Canonical.
Wayland is NOT developed by Canonical.
Any other DE is NOT developed by Canonical, notice bold unless you don;t know what is DE and what is shit called Unity.
Mesa is NOT developed by Canonical.
......
Anything that matters is NOT developed by Canonical. Can you please enlighten me about SOME DEVELOPMENT GOING ON IN CANONICALS CAMP THAT IS GOING TO COMPETE WITH APPLE'S OSX OR MS WINDOWS?PLEASE

[alexThunder]

Get lost you stupid troll. Seriously what a joke, are you sick or what? Canonicals fail unity is what competes with apple's osx? You gotta be drinking very old milk.
PLEASE CAN YOU COMPREHEND SIMPLE THINGS:
Linux kernel is NOT developed by Canonical.
GNOME is NOT developed by Canonical.
KDE is NOT developed by Canonical.
Xorg is NOT developed by Canonical.
Wayland is NOT developed by Canonical.
Any other DE is NOT developed by Canonical, notice bold unless you don;t know what is DE and what is shit called Unity.
Mesa is NOT developed by Canonical.
......
Anything that matters is NOT developed by Canonical. Can you please enlighten me about SOME DEVELOPMENT GOING ON IN CANONICALS CAMP THAT IS GOING TO COMPETE WITH APPLE'S OSX OR MS WINDOWS?PLEASE

The development is, that they'll take away your DE, your kernel, your displayserver and everything else to force you into their walled Eden and purge you of your sinful thoughts, which do not fit into their Mind-Matrix. Stop complaining and accept your new holy greatness Lord Kim-Jong Shuttleworth!

Don't you dare questioning him ever again! Otherwise, expect to be drowned in fish!

[phoen1x]

The development is, that they'll take away your DE, your kernel, your displayserver and everything else to force you into their walled Eden and purge you of your sinful thoughts, which do not fit into their Mind-Matrix. Stop complaining and accept your new holy greatness Lord Shuttleworth.

Don't you dare questioning him ever again!

FAIL bs joke, care to try again? better yet get the F out.

[synaptix]

The development is, that they'll take away your DE, your kernel, your displayserver and everything else to force you into their walled Eden and purge you of your sinful thoughts, which do not fit into their Mind-Matrix. Stop complaining and accept your new holy greatness Lord Kim-Jong Shuttleworth!

Don't you dare questioning him ever again!

[alexThunder]

FAIL bs joke, care to try again? better yet get the F out.

Edit: damn you synaptix ...

[Sergey Shambir]

MIR's licensing (you have to assign Canonical your copyright) basically makes it impossible for any other distribution to use MIR without giving up control over a very important part of a desktop linux system.
Licensing is one of the main concerns regarding MIR. So in this case, Canonical actually deserves the blame

Please delete all Qt and KDE software on your computer. Any contribution to qt-project needs to assing the same contribution agreement with Digia, so please do not put at risk our freedom by supporting Qt framework and any software built on top of it.