The Thousands Of FIXMEs & TODOs In The Linux Kernel

[phoronix]

Phoronix: The Thousands Of FIXMEs & TODOs In The Linux Kernel

Canonical's Colin King has looked at the number of FIXME and TODO comments within the Linux kernel tree...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Linux-Kernel-FIXME-TODO

[Linuxhippy]

In case Canonical would contribute more actively to the kernel, those FIXME/TODOs most likely could be reduced quite a bit.
Instead they use all their engineering force to fork stuff and create a software stack incompatible with all the existing FOSS solutions :/

[YoungManKlaus]

Cute. Got a code base that's like 1% of the kernel size and has at least 10% of it's TODOs and most things I saw looked the same (or people playing deaf and blind).

[Marc Driftmeyer]

Welcome to horders paradise. Everything here has a place. I just haven't figured out where to put it all, and how it will improve the system. Now where did I put all those TO DOs and FIX Mes. Oh yes! Right in horders paradise.

[ColinIanKing]

In case Canonical would contribute more actively to the kernel, those FIXME/TODOs most likely could be reduced quite a bit.
Instead they use all their engineering force to fork stuff and create a software stack incompatible with all the existing FOSS solutions :/

Well, I want to refute that. In just past the past year alone I have made over 2000+ commits to various projects [1]. Some of these I've developed during my paid hours in Canonical and are used by various other distros. I've also been submitting patches to the Kernel rather frequently as I am focused on fixing small bugs that creep into the kernel.

Here are some projects I've been creating for the greater good: http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~cking/
Note that one of the projects, "The Firmware Test Suite" has is a UEFI recognised defacto firmware test suite used by many companies [2]

So to say "Instead they use all their engineering force to fork stuff and create a software stack incompatible with all the existing FOSS solutions :/ " is tiresome, as you clearly need to check out your facts rather then keep re-cycling this fallacy.

[1] https://github.com/ColinIanKing
[2] http://www.uefi.org/testtools

[ElectricPrism]

It sounds like the kernel has excellent comment notations suggesting improvements above and beyond necessary functioning.

People have legitimate reasons to be annoyed with Canonical.
✓ Mir
✓Unity 8 being so far behind announced schedule
✓ Abandoned projects like ✓ Upstart, ✓ Ubuntu Software Center, ✓Ubuntu One
✓ The way the Ubuntu Council & Mark Shuttleworth forced Jonathan Riddell out of leadership on Kubuntu
✓ Kickstarting Ubuntu Edge and then not doing it after 12 million backing.
✓ Waiting on full Ubuntu Convergance and a non-rebranded Android
✓ Waiting on Canonical to sell Ubuntu Phone directly to consumers via Telecommunication Stores

The list goes on and on and on.

ColinIanKing - Great job on your personal work and your commercially funded work aswell. Me personally - I think it's immoral to rename the "Linux Kernel" as the "Ubuntu Kernel", but It's a good thing to have more hands in projects.

The criticism against Canonical takes many forms, it may be recycled or not 100% technically correct, but the motive and frustrations are real and well founded.

"Instead they use all their engineering force to fork stuff and create a software stack incompatible with all the existing FOSS solutions :/ " The technicalities are irellevant to me because the message is clear - Canonical doesn't like to play outside of their sandbox and has made some really dumb decisions without considering the people that supported them in FOSS.

It's annoying to see all these "new ideas" get pioneered, get users onboard and excited, and then be thrown in the trash after a year or two, what a waste. This is the message most people want to give - wasted time, energy, code, and distraction from projects that will be here for 30+ years is annoying.

[Linuxhippy]

Well, I want to refute that.

There is a yearly report by the Linux Foundadtion: http://www.linuxfoundation.org/sites...%202.18.15.jpg
Canonical is not contained in the Top 15 Linux contributors (however, much smaller SUSE is).
Whereever I look, RedHat is a top contributor (Kernel, XOrg, GTK, SystemD, ...), Canonical is usually nowhere in the Top 10.

An older report from 2013 even argues about it: http://arstechnica.com/information-t...-contributors/

Canonical contributed 548 changes in the period studied in today's report and would have cracked the top 30 if the foundation hadn't included "none" and "unknown" in the rankings. The maker of Ubuntu has been criticized for years for not contributing more to the kernel (and recently clashed with Intel over patches submitted to the company's graphics driver)

.

Don't take me wrong, I think it is great you are working on FOSS projects and that sometimes canonical even pays you.

[profoundWHALE]

It sounds like the kernel has excellent comment notations suggesting improvements above and beyond necessary functioning.

People have legitimate reasons to be annoyed with Canonical.
✓ Mir

So one group of developers are mad that they didn't do it their way. Canonical is going to need control one way or another if they are going to have a display server + compositor + environment on both phones and desktops. Wayland and Mir do overlap in many areas but are not the same and neither are their goals.

✓Unity 8 being so far behind announced schedule

This either has to do with overconfidence in how much they can get done or how difficult it is to complete, or different priorities putting this on the backburner. I'm not disagreeing with you though.

✓ Abandoned projects like ✓ Upstart, ✓ Ubuntu Software Center, ✓Ubuntu One

Upstart is still supported by them and is still used by Google in their Chromebooks.

Ubuntu Software Center was perhaps the first attractive way to find and install things on Ubuntu and IIRC is getting a complete re-write. That's like saying AMD is abandoning Catalyst or Mesa because of amdgpu work.

Ubuntu One IIRC simply was not very popular. I sort of used it... but that's it. Development time is going elsewhere which I consider a plus, not a con.

✓ The way the Ubuntu Council & Mark Shuttleworth forced Jonathan Riddell out of leadership on Kubuntu

This was handled poorly on BOTH sides. Simply do not place all the blame on one side.

✓ Kickstarting Ubuntu Edge and then not doing it after 12 million backing.

12 million backing that didn't reach it's goal, meaning they received a whopping ZERO DOLLARS from that. So you're clearly trolling now.

✓ Waiting on full Ubuntu Convergance and a non-rebranded Android

The convergence thing I get, that's also going to be coming with Unity 8, whenever that happens. Wait, what was that?

✓ [snip] and a non-rebranded Android

Hahaha what?

✓ Waiting on Canonical to sell Ubuntu Phone directly to consumers via Telecommunication Stores

Considering that Microsoft is throwing money at Telcos with their Windows phone and it has only just recently reached Blackberry's marketshare...

The list goes on and on and on.

Can I add you to my list of trolls that goes on and on? Thanks.

[caligula]

So one group of developers are mad that they didn't do it their way. Canonical is going to need control one way or another if they are going to have a display server + compositor + environment on both phones and desktops. Wayland and Mir do overlap in many areas but are not the same and neither are their goals.


This either has to do with overconfidence in how much they can get done or how difficult it is to complete, or different priorities putting this on the backburner. I'm not disagreeing with you though.


Upstart is still supported by them and is still used by Google in their Chromebooks.

But for how long? You think people should switch from Systemd to upstart now? It's long past its prime time (which really didn't take too long) and now being in maintenance mode until they pull the plug in few years. What about bzr? Launchpad? Their tech just seems like vaporware. I have my doubts about Mir. It might work for a while but if everyone else is behind Wayland, how long until they'll just abandon it. Ubuntu's solutions might help their customers in short term, but they're bad at offering long term solutions and in the end the short term solutions are just legacy systems without future.

[ElectricPrism]

Ubuntu Software Center IIRC is getting a complete re-write. That's like saying AMD is abandoning Catalyst or Mesa because of amdgpu work.

Catalyst - A Kernel Driver
Mesa - A Graphics Library
AMDGPU - A Kernel Driver

I had no idea that Catalyst, Mesa and AMDGPU were the same thing - please let me bask in your wisdom as apparantly all three are interchangably the same thing.


"complete re-write" you say? That sounds like a entirely different code-base - thank you for validating my original opinion and statement that Ubuntu Software Center is "abandoned".

USC has been neglected so bad that it now requires a rewrite when little effort was made to improve it over the last 5 years. USC can even make i7's cry and grind to a halt leaving users to thank USC for frequent lockups courtesy of Ubuntu Software Center.

Ubuntu One IIRC simply was not very popular. I sort of used it... but that's it. Development time is going elsewhere which I consider a plus, not a con.

Ubuntu One not being "popular" was not my statement. My statment was that it was "abandoned".

Many people feel that Resources: - including Time, Money, and Code, could have gone into other projects that would not be "dead" today. Ubuntu One is abandoned, case closed, another nail in the preverbial coffin.

[Speaking about Kubuntu Leader Forced Off Kubuntu] This was handled poorly on BOTH sides. Simply do not place all the blame on one side.

I will draw my own conclusions on the matter. Did you have some relevant piece of information to add or are you just going to tell me to agree with you "because you say so".

12 million backing that didn't reach it's goal, meaning they received a whopping ZERO DOLLARS from that. So you're clearly trolling now.

Do you always try to invalidate your oponents in debate by calling them names?

Or are you keenly interested in gaining more intelligence by debating contrasting views to cause the truth to be illuminated. If you are already a "genius" then you have nothing more to learn.

Can I add you to my list of trolls that goes on and on? Thanks.

You have a list of trolls? It sounds like you have a miserable time on the Internet, may I ask what it feels like thinking of people as trolls until proven otherwise? Guilty until proven innocent? What does that feel like to have that preventive safeguard.

Is your ego so weak that you have to "put up the shield" before engaging anyone in a civil & illuminatory discussion?

Are you aware that when you call someone names you shame yourself? You have hit below the belt jumping to conclusions and rendering drum-head trial judgement according to your own perceptions and paranoia about the people around you.

Is that all you know how to do - judge others based on the limited information quickly and assume you know their motives without giving anyone the benefit of the doubt?

Apparantly you lack the ability to properly interpret and discern the intent, flavor and full meaning of what people write that you read.

You're going to have a very VERY fun life with those qualities and that attitude I can guarantee you that much.