Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Gentoo Developers Unhappy, Fork udev

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • XorEaxEax
    replied
    Originally posted by ryao View Post
    Canonical has done wonders for Linux marketshare and our community grows in size as Ubuntu users have jumped ship. On the other hand, RedHat's actions have been fairly problematic. RedHat developers do not care about regressions that their patches cause in software that we distribute, which causes plenty of headaches for us. RedHat is also actively trying to chase other contributors to OSS projects away, such as Oracle and RisingTide Systems.

    Which company do you think that we would prefer to go bankrupt tomorrow?
    Who are 'we'? Are you now speaking for Gentoo as a whole, I really hope not because I doubt I could fathom a worse spokesperson.

    And while I'm grateful for the work Canonical has put into making Linux a 'mainstream' desktop possibility, there's no comparing Red Hat's and Canonical's contributions to the Linux ecosystem, Oracle doesn't even register.

    Leave a comment:


  • kigurai
    replied
    Originally posted by ryao View Post
    I still do not understand what is special about GNOME that the GNOME developers feel it necessary to try to force a dependency. They are just giving downstream developers more work to do.
    They force dependencies on you all the time, just like all other projects. In this case, it happens to be a dependency that you disagree with.
    Yes, I know it "would make GNOME Linux only", but there are some points to consider:
    1) Isn't that the de facto case already?
    2) The dependency is IIRC on the systemd interface, meaning that you can replace it with other software that provides the same functionality.

    Leave a comment:


  • ryao
    replied
    Originally posted by Akka View Post
    I think they plan to support the systemd features but keep some sort of compatibility with systemd free system . But I suppose "solid" needs systemd support first?
    I still do not understand what is special about GNOME that the GNOME developers feel it necessary to try to force a dependency. They are just giving downstream developers more work to do.

    Leave a comment:


  • Akka
    replied
    Originally posted by ryao View Post
    I am not involved with QEMU maintenance. I suggest that you contact Doug Goldstein for details.

    As for systemd, why is it that the GNOME project feels that mandatory dependence on such features is necessary when the KDE project does not? The KDE project seems to have no trouble writing cross platform compatible code. The only instance in which KDE fails to be cross platform involves Network Manager, which is Linux specific. As far as I know, Network Manager is developed primarily by RedHat employees.
    I think they plan to support the systemd features but keep some sort of compatibility with systemd free system . But I suppose "solid" needs systemd support first?

    Leave a comment:


  • ryao
    replied
    As an additional note, I am putting the finishes touches on the kmod work. There are a few additional things that I want to address, but it will be back in HEAD soon.

    Leave a comment:


  • ryao
    replied
    Originally posted by AdamW View Post
    okay, I already tried this once, but this is way off into the weeds, and I'm not interested in a bash fest. either we get back on the topic of udev or I'm out.
    I cannot imagine having a productive conversation with you about eudev until we do our first tag. We are a few weeks away from that. Lets talk then.

    Leave a comment:


  • AdamW
    replied
    okay, I already tried this once, but this is way off into the weeds, and I'm not interested in a bash fest. either we get back on the topic of udev or I'm out.

    Leave a comment:


  • ryao
    replied
    Originally posted by AdamW View Post
    Okay, I should qualify that somewhat. Oracle's contributions are significantly smaller than RH's - or, indeed, for instance, SUSE's, or many other projects, even non-commercial ones. And Oracle contributes nothing significant to the development of the precise codebase they ship, i.e. RHEL.
    Their Linux port of DTrace seems useful. RedPatch is also rather nice.

    With that said, I do not think RedHat gives Oracle much opportunity to contribute to RHEL development. That could change if RedHat were to adopt Canonical's practices of giving commit privileges to people outside their organization and having an open bug tracker.
    Last edited by ryao; 11-22-2012, 08:09 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • ryao
    replied
    Originally posted by AdamW View Post
    I have to say that's the first I've heard of any such concerns with qemu. Have these been documented on the appropriate lists? Use of systemd by GNOME has nothing much to do with 'Red Hat influence' and everything to do with the fact that systemd provides capabilities of which GNOME wishes to make use. The whole point of systemd is to provide capabilities that sysv does not provide, after all. If it didn't, there'd be no point to its existence.
    I am not involved with QEMU maintenance. I suggest that you contact Doug Goldstein for details.

    As for systemd, why is it that the GNOME project feels that mandatory dependence on such features is necessary when the KDE project does not? The KDE project seems to have no trouble writing cross platform compatible code. The only instance in which KDE fails to be cross platform involves Network Manager, which is Linux specific. As far as I know, Network Manager is developed primarily by RedHat employees. They seem to only care about Linux (and quite possibly, only RedHat's version of it). This causes headaches for us because Gentoo encompasses more than just Linux. Unfortunately, our teams dedicated to non-Linux things lack the man power necessary to address that issue.

    With that said, Gentoo has its own cross platform solution called OpenRC that runs on top of sysvinit. I do not think that we would be having this conversation had OpenRC been incorporated into Fedora instead of Upstart.

    Leave a comment:


  • AdamW
    replied
    Originally posted by curaga View Post
    Last I checked, Oracle still employed people working on X, btrfs, and gcc. Has this changed?
    Okay, I should qualify that somewhat. Oracle's contributions are significantly smaller than RH's - or, indeed, for instance, SUSE's, or many other projects, even non-commercial ones. And Oracle contributes nothing significant to the development of the precise codebase they ship, i.e. RHEL.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X