Originally posted by royce
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Ubuntu Is Looking At Offering Better WiFi Support By Using Intel's IWD
Collapse
X
-
Canonical is a private for profit company with private interests, whereas most distro providers or indeed the kernel team are not. Not all companies choose to conduct business in the same way either nor are they based on the same countries and bound by the same legal framework.
It wouldn't be the first time people over-react to things like these. I've done a number of contributions (edit: to canonical server tooling) myself and I didn't find any of it to be a big deal. I still own the copyright to my code and can license it in any way I see fit. If I wanted to.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by omer666It is not "rewriting history", it's just an interpretation of it, and to say the least, the most accurate.
Originally posted by grigiHuh? I was trying to provide context to answer a question.
Please stop attacking people for perceived slights. It's not useful to the conversation.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by grigi View Post
I think (s)he's alluding to the previous projects where Ubuntu went their own way when a viable solution already existed.
Some examples are:
* Bzr
* launchpad (was a leading OSS code hosting platform at a time, but the requirement of bzr killed it for many, and hosting your own was near impossible)
* Unity (pre-8 was pretty awesome, and actually blazed some trails)
* Upstart
* Mir
* Snap
Launchpad worked till better alternatives came up and guess what it was GitHub, proprietary.
Upstart existed and worked great for quite a few years SUSE and Ubuntu, two of the top distros used that, till something better came up.
Snap, while you may not like it, didn't have an "alternate" at the time. The distro packaging formats only work for building a distro, nothing else. Ask an ISV and you'll know.
I like to think Canonical as a company that may not have success with it's side projects but always dared to do things that no one in the free software community had the resources or motivation for.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by grigi View Post
I think (s)he's alluding to the previous projects where Ubuntu went their own way when a viable solution already existed.
Some examples are:
* Bzr
* launchpad (was a leading OSS code hosting platform at a time, but the requirement of bzr killed it for many, and hosting your own was near impossible)
* Unity (pre-8 was pretty awesome, and actually blazed some trails)
* Upstart
* Mir
* Snap
* Bzr is older than Git, so this is an argument against Git rather than Bzr. Because both Git and Bzr solves problems compared to earlier systems, so if the creation of Bzr was wrong, then it was more wrong to make Git.
* I don't know what you're comparing Snap to. Can you name another packaging system that fulfills the same requirements that existed at the time Snap was designed?
* The Mir display server still doesn't have any competitors. We no longer have any DS suitable for the specific use-case that Mir was designed for. I wonder how it made your list of preexisting things that Canonical replaced for the sake of replacing them?
It is difficult to counter your claim that it was nearly impossible to run Lauchpad. My guess is you never tried and pretty much just made that one up in order to have something bad to say about Launchpad. I mean, after all, it's much easier to run Lauchpad than it is to run GitHub, which is very popular.
Honestly, it's not that much, but they often do them for what appears to be the wrong reasons.
I also think their insistence in having a CLA that any contributor needs to sign killed many of their projects for them.
Comment
-
Originally posted by starshipeleven View PostIt's just a sarcastic way to state that Canonical has a long history of reinventing the wheel where they really should not have done that.
Comment
-
Originally posted by CochainComplex View Post
On the other hand Canonical - as said by others tend to reinvent the wheel - instead of participating or make existing solutions better.
* Bzr is older than Git, so Git was the NIH-project, not Bzr.
* Upstart is older than Systemd init, so Systemd init is the NIH-project.
* Compiz is older then Mutter, so Mutter is the NIH-project, not Compiz.
* Mir had feature requirements that were incompatible with Weston. Nothing similar exists to date, meaning not a NIH-project.
* Snap is still the only system of its kind, so it's not a NIH-project.
So which wheels is it people feel that they've recreated?
Comment
-
Originally posted by om26er View Post
Upstart existed and worked great for quite a few years SUSE and Ubuntu, two of the top distros used that, till something better came up.
I like to think Canonical as a company that may not have success with it's side projects but always dared to do things that no one in the free software community had the resources or motivation for.
Comment
Comment