Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Linux Mint Debian Edition 3 Now Shipping
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by starshipeleven View PostIt became popular with the Ubuntu GUI change, not before.
Additionaly these GUI changes after Gnome 2 deprecation makes it even more popular, but it is not a primary reason they became popular reallyLast edited by dungeon; 31 August 2018, 12:35 PM.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by tichunWould there be a difference if they added a bundle of packages to Debian, so you could get all their work with simple # apt install mint-desktop-cinnamon versus having a separate distribution?
edit: same question applies to most distributions ^^
edit 2: imagine ubuntu, red hat, steamos, clear linux, chromeos etc. as one.
In this World there are about 7K languages, about 7K ethnicities, but just about 200ish countries... these are like linux distributions, so there are major or minor players More and more you try to unite more, more and more the opposite effect happens and people invent something else
Comment
-
Since Canonical is now best friends with Microsoft and is rapidly stepping in Windows 10's shoes with spyware, data collection and other crap, I really like that Linux Mint devs are offering this alternative.
I'm just curious now how easy it's to install KDE Plasma on it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cerberus View PostNice strawman you got there. Nothing stops you from fixing bugs and submitting code and patches to existing projects or submitting your work to the archives and maintaining it.
Nothing stops them from being rejected cause some guy in charge there didn't like it, either.
A lot of time "patches are not welcome" is a much closer truth to open source in general, because it doesn't align with their shitty vision. Maybe you'd understand if you actually contributed anything anywhere.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Weasel View PostRight, nothing stops you.
Nothing stops them from being rejected cause some guy in charge there didn't like it, either.
A lot of time "patches are not welcome" is a much closer truth to open source in general, because it doesn't align with their shitty vision. Maybe you'd understand if you actually contributed anything anywhere.
Many times upstream rejects contributions that are poorly written (i.e. hacks), or would increase their maintenance burden for no real benefit to their own project, like for example Gallium Nine.
And it's not always downstream's fault either, sometimes (many times in commercial products) it's not really worth it to actually doing a proper upstreamable job, and you just fork, make your little hacking around, and then ship a product powered by the opensource software you hacked.
Comment
-
Originally posted by starshipeleven View PostThat's right but you are pointing a loaded gun to upstream developers. It's not always the case of the upstream being asshats for no reason, sometimes they do have a point too. Let's ignore Ubuntu for a moment.
Originally posted by starshipeleven View PostMany times upstream rejects contributions that are poorly written (i.e. hacks), or would increase their maintenance burden for no real benefit to their own project, like for example Gallium Nine.
What irks me is this "No real benefit to their own project". That's the problem right there. It's their project and sometimes people disagree with that fact and their vision for the project. The amount of people who use Gallium 9 should speak for itself that it is a benefit to a lot of people, just not to the guy in charge of that project or whoever else was responsible (I don't think it was Alexandre who rejected it).
Furthermore the code is already written so it's not like people are asking others to waste their time coding it. Of course, reviewing it and maintaining it costs time , but how about the guy who wasted time writing the code in the first place? Does his time not matter? He wasted a lot of time and resources writing it and people benefit from it.
So... fork?
See? That's why it happens. (I'm not answering you here, cause I know you're aware of it already, but explaining it to the other guy who was clueless as to why forks exist cause he thinks you can contribute to a project anything you want)
Though technically speaking Gallium 9 is not a fork, so it's not quite the best example here, but whatever. ;-)Last edited by Weasel; 31 August 2018, 05:27 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Weasel View PostRight, nothing stops you.
Nothing stops them from being rejected cause some guy in charge there didn't like it, either.
A lot of time "patches are not welcome" is a much closer truth to open source in general, because it doesn't align with their shitty vision. Maybe you'd understand if you actually contributed anything anywhere.
Comment
-
Debian as project spans every use case from boring servers to crazy, "just-so" configured programmer workstations. That (lack of? Overly broad?) focus is bound to yield more friction when optimizing for a specific use case (i.e. desktop-only for instance).
I get that duplication of effort is a thing, but from a management perspective (in a general sense), I'd guess that it's easier for an organization to deliver a well-honed product to its target audience if it can relentlessly optimize for said target audience. Forking an Open Source codebase such as Debian initially lowers the barrier to entry in the semi-boutique/derivative/niche OS space.
But this initial cost is small compared to the amortized lifetime cost of maintaining a fork, making its maintenance mostly pointlessly duplicated effort in the long run. There's obviously more than one side to issue at hand I guess.Last edited by ermo; 01 September 2018, 03:03 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by starshipeleven View PostIf there is someone to blame for this specific case we can blame Ubuntu. Linux Mint was born when Ubuntu switched from GNOME2 to Unity.
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment