Originally posted by pal666
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
A Vast Majority Of Linux's Input Improvements Are Developed By One Individual
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by schmidtbag View PostSure they can, because otherwise that person is fired or put elsewhere.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by pal666 View Postthat's how you would run company, not how redhat works. redhat hires experts, not tells people what to do. btw this is why only moron would accuse redhat of developing something. when redhat is left without btrfs devs, redhat switches to xfs
Comment
-
Originally posted by schmidtbag View PostExactly my point... They hire experts. They're not going to put someone in Hutterer's position who doesn't know a thing about what they're doing. That's why if whoever they do hire doesn't know what they're doing, they have the resources to find someone else. How are you not getting this?
Comment
-
Originally posted by pal666 View Posthow are you not getting that there's no other libinput expert to hire atm? did you read article?
Comment
-
Originally posted by schmidtbag View PostHmm, for whatever reason I thought upstart came after systemd. My bad.
Originally posted by schmidtbag View PostRegardless of how bad Gnome 3 was, Unity (which also was pretty broken to start with) was still heavily dependent on it. Rather than make their own fork, Canonical could've just helped Gnome 3 get better and speed up the process. Remember: the reason people gripe about Canonical is because of how many times they fork things. It's not always something as big as Unity or Mir either.
Anyway, I'm aware there were other forks, but to my knowledge, most of them were basically just mashups of different environments. Unity was far more ambitious, and the greatest issue is Canonical actually had the resources to fix Gnome 3. Instead, they just decided to do things their own way. Same applies to Mir.
Canonical didn't develop Unity just because "they wanted to do their own thing". They had disagreements with Gnome developers on what should be done, and obviously could not get the changes they wanted done in Gnome for that reason. Even the performance updates that were added recently took months of discussion. The only reason Canonical has changed course now is because they are dropping everything to do with the desktop. This will bite them in the future as they are now at the mercy of the Gnome project. You know that whole "NIH" thing you are complaining about? Yeah, Gnome and Red Hat do that all the time. Except when they do it, people adopt their systems and call it community driven. It's nothing but propaganda.
Comment
-
Originally posted by cynical View PostThat's because of the typical propaganda about Red Hat doing no wrong and Canonical being the devil. Essentially the stuff you are still perpetuating.
Seeing as you're obviously heavily biased on this situation, part of me questions if you're worth wasting my time on.
This is a dumb point. Why doesn't Gnome just fold up shop and help KDE "get better and speed up the process"? Why don't all distributions just fold up and help Debian get better?
So - my gripe is how Canonical wasted the time and resources of basically everyone who was invested in Gnome or "vanilla" Ubuntu.
Maybe it's because they have their own goals, and it's impossible to achieve them without agreement from others unless you own the codebase yourself?
You know that whole "NIH" thing you are complaining about? Yeah, Gnome and Red Hat do that all the time. Except when they do it, people adopt their systems and call it community driven. It's nothing but propaganda.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Britoid View PostWith no Red Hat and its employees, half of the current Linux userspace wouldn't exist in its current form (gnome, wayland, systemd, dbus, colord, NetworkManager, polkit, sssd, packagekit, kvm).
Originally posted by Britoid View PostI hope IBM keeps the Red Hat technique of promoting independent open source projects of which then you build commercial products on top.
Comment
Comment