GNOME OS Is Taking Shape But Its To Serve For Testing The Desktop

[jo-erlend]

Note: Canonical today is not the same as Canonical 2016! Today they do a lot of good things on GNOME and Debian. It’s nice to know that a CLA predator actually can turn Lawful Good.

I don't understand what's predatory about not giving away your right to open source your own product the way you want to license it. Nobody's calling GNU or Apache predatory.

[Auzy]

Because Canonical's open source projects are always set up one sided and without community involvement, but Canonical tries to use Ubuntu's dominance to push them everywhere.

e.g. snap.

One could also argue though, that every distro has such projects though..

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but Snap's main competitor is Flatpak (Flatpak was launched 6 months after Snap). Bazaar was actually launched before Git too.

Unity I agree they should have worked more with the community, but they dropped Unity now anyway.. Mir was also a cockup (that was announced years after Wayland apparently). That being said though, they weren't bad projects, and more options are always better

They also used debs for their base too, used pulseaudio, etc, so they did follow a lot of standards.

The community involvement issue for some of their projects to me always seemed to be stalled due to other reasons.. In a lot of cases, it wasn't actually Canonical doing the forcing to be honest from what I saw). I think Canonical just gets more slack than many other projects personally..

I'm biased though, since I use Ubuntu btw.. But other than the private development of Unity, I don't feel they really did anything bad for the community..

[Britoid]

Note: Canonical today is not the same as Canonical 2016! Today they do a lot of good things on GNOME and Debian. It’s nice to know that a CLA predator actually can turn Lawful Good.

I don't see any difference. It's well known that Canonical's behaviour is caused by Shuttleworth and he isn't going anywhere.

[Britoid]

One could also argue though, that every distro has such projects though..

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but Snap's main competitor is Flatpak (Flatpak was launched 6 months after Snap). Bazaar was actually launched before Git too.

Unity I agree they should have worked more with the community, but they dropped Unity now anyway.. Mir was also a cockup (that was announced years after Wayland apparently). That being said though, they weren't bad projects, and more options are always better

They also used debs for their base too, used pulseaudio, etc, so they did follow a lot of standards.

The community involvement issue for some of their projects to me always seemed to be stalled due to other reasons.. In a lot of cases, it wasn't actually Canonical doing the forcing to be honest from what I saw). I think Canonical just gets more slack than many other projects personally..

I'm biased though, since I use Ubuntu btw.. But other than the private development of Unity, I don't feel they really did anything bad for the community..

Flatpak, Wayland, Pulseaudio, git etc etc were all started as community projects. Yes, they had commercial backing with Red Hat, but Red Hat let the community actually own the projects and doesn't put a dumb CLA around it that lets one company retain ownership of the project.

Lennart will be in charge of systemd even if he quits Red Hat, although he probably won't quit because no other job would likely let him work on the stuff the way he does.

[Mez']

Because Canonical's open source projects are always set up one sided and without community involvement, but Canonical tries to use Ubuntu's dominance to push them everywhere.

e.g. snap.

The problem is that there is a conflict between some fundamentalists dev-centric doing their thing and the user-centric views of Canonical.
Initially, what you call the community (but is heavily led and influenced by one company when it comes to Gnome) is against Canonical views, since they're a bit blindsided. They will block anything Canonical comes up with due to their very narrow agenda. They're galaxies away from common users' reality.
Canonical doesn't always have any other choice but to pursue their own thing if they want it to materialize without the contemptuous refusals of upstream.
The community is led on to believe Canonical is bad and some undercover cultists will spread nonsense to reinforce that (a bit like infiltrated russian agents trying to weaken the EU).

And some people who can't look beyond the end of their nose will point how they don't involve the community.

In the end, Canonical projects usually benefit users the most, as Ubuntu focuses on them (not just "more", but opposite to "not at all") . While cultists will blame them, users couldn't care less and they keep on adopting Ubuntu as it cares about them, empowers them and let them pick the workflows that suit them best.

I'm not saying Canonical are always right, they made several mistakes over the years. But they usually think with users in mind, not against them. As a user, I feel at least partially supported by Ubuntu while it's blatantly obvious Gnome devs couldn't care less if nobody was using Gnome. They would keep on developing for themselves anyway.

[Mez']

One could also argue though, that every distro has such projects though..

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but Snap's main competitor is Flatpak (Flatpak was launched 6 months after Snap). Bazaar was actually launched before Git too.

Unity I agree they should have worked more with the community, but they dropped Unity now anyway.. Mir was also a cockup (that was announced years after Wayland apparently). That being said though, they weren't bad projects, and more options are always better

They also used debs for their base too, used pulseaudio, etc, so they did follow a lot of standards.

The community involvement issue for some of their projects to me always seemed to be stalled due to other reasons.. In a lot of cases, it wasn't actually Canonical doing the forcing to be honest from what I saw). I think Canonical just gets more slack than many other projects personally..

I'm biased though, since I use Ubuntu btw.. But other than the private development of Unity, I don't feel they really did anything bad for the community..

They wanted to work with Gnome and the community. But the people in their bunker refused, to the detriment of the community.

They did the right thing in developing Unity. They had no other choice.

[Britoid]

The problem is that there is a conflict between some fundamentalists dev-centric doing their thing and the user-centric views of Canonical.
Initially, what you call the community (but is heavily led and influenced by one company when it comes to Gnome) is against Canonical views, since they're a bit blindsided. They will block anything Canonical comes up with due to their very narrow agenda. They're galaxies away from common users' reality.
Canonical doesn't always have any other choice but to pursue their own thing if they want it to materialize without the contemptuous refusals of upstream.
The community is led on to believe Canonical is bad and some undercover cultists will spread nonsense to reinforce that (a bit like infiltrated russian agents trying to weaken the EU).

And some people who can't look beyond the end of their nose will point how they don't involve the community.

In the end, Canonical projects usually benefit users the most, as Ubuntu focuses on them (not just "more", but opposite to "not at all") . While cultists will blame them, users couldn't care less and they keep on adopting Ubuntu as it cares about them, empowers them and let them pick the workflows that suit them best.

I'm not saying Canonical are always right, they made several mistakes over the years. But they usually think with users in mind, not against them. As a user, I feel at least partially supported by Ubuntu while it's blatantly obvious Gnome devs couldn't care less if nobody was using Gnome. They would keep on developing for themselves anyway.

I don't see anything SUSE getting blocked or looked down upon. Canonical is a company that flirts with closed-source software and in-fact makes and promotes it.

But then this is the Canonical that made a project to try and make CLA's the normal in the open source world, which of course got rejected by the community.

[Mez']

I don't see anything SUSE getting blocked or looked down upon. Canonical is a company that flirts with closed-source software and in-fact makes and promotes it.

But then this is the Canonical that made a project to try and make CLA's the normal in the open source world, which of course got rejected by the community.

I shared my 2 cents regardless of licenses and open/closed source, I don't know anything about licensing and will let you specialists debate on this specific point instead of talking about something I have no clue about.

Indeed, I only care about open Vs closed to a limited extent. Which might also be why I have no grudge against Canonical. As a user, I'm fine with some apps that are closed-source (Spotify, Netflix, ...) if they have no worthy equivalent. And since Unity was much better than Gnome for my workflow...

[Spooktra]

How exactly is "Gnome OS" different than any other distro that uses Gnome? To me, Gnome OS sounds like the Gnome people took their desktop and put a Linux kernel, api/abi, shell, and utilities under it, which is exactly what a distro with Gnome as its default desktop is.

BTW, gnomes belong in your garden, not your desktop.

[higgslagrangian]

Except nobody does, and they rack up likes to no end.
The more they get, the weaker the Other Desktops are and the less Freedom we have.

Your excuse is "they got likes"?

Do you want to have a CoC here that says "No likes for posts that offend me"? Grow up.

You have the ego of one of those reddit moderators.