| |||||||||||||
Re: ControversialRe: ControversialPosted Sep 18, 2008 2:03 UTC (Thu) by mmcgrath (subscriber, #44906)In reply to: Controversial by corbet Parent article: LPC: Fitting into the kernel ecosystem
No worries corbet, you did right by the write up as far as I can see. Though it is natural that the Canonical folk would want to save face. One day they'll learn, patches speak louder then words.
(Log in to post comments)
Re: Controversial Posted Sep 18, 2008 11:40 UTC (Thu) by mkflint (guest, #50223) [Link]
> patches speak louder than words
Yes they do! But so does artwork, integration, innovation, documentation, marketing, blah blah blah.
The primary goals, as I see them, are to create a great quality product and to increase usage of Free Software. And the kernel is just one part of that whole experience.
While each individual kernel developer has a preferred distro, the project as a whole should be distro-agnostic. I hope Greg KH made it clear that he was speaking as "Greg KH", and not as "Linux Kernel Representative".
Re: Controversial Posted Sep 24, 2008 0:02 UTC (Wed) by daniel (subscriber, #3181) [Link]
I find GregKH's statement overtly offensive with no possible excuse. And just to be clear, I am not aligned with any Linux Vendor. However, such ill considered public behavior reflects poorly on Suse, not just GregKH.
Regards,
Daniel
Re: Controversial Posted Sep 24, 2008 1:46 UTC (Wed) by mmcgrath (subscriber, #44906) [Link]
So you're saying he's right, he's wrong or that he just shouldn't be expressing his opinions / organizing metrics?
Re: Controversial Posted Sep 24, 2008 3:46 UTC (Wed) by daniel (subscriber, #3181) [Link]
I am saying you are wrong to applaud that sort of antisocial behavior.
Regards,
Daniel
Re: Controversial Posted Sep 25, 2008 14:05 UTC (Thu) by SEMW (guest, #52697) [Link]
> "patches speak louder then words"
True, but I do wonder how many patches Canonical GregKH feels would speak loud enough.
Canonical has ~130 employees; Novell has ~4100. So, considering the table for kernel contributions at the top, this works out at ~0.77 patches per employee for Canonical, and ~1.77 for Novell; a touch under 2.5 times as many.
But now consider that SuSE Linux has been around since 1994*, and Ubuntu, since 2004. That's around... Well, 2.5 times as long.
So it seems to me that Canonical doesn't actually do too badly out of the comparison.
* I am assuming that the table at the top doesn't distinguish between contributions from Novell SUSE and S.u.S.E.
(I admit that that's a slightly dodgy calculation, in that neither Novell nor S.u.S.E will have had anything like 4100 employees in 1994 -- but then, neither will Canonical have had 130 in 2004. I'm not aiming for a scientific comparison, only pointing out that presenting the raw numbers with no context of company size, as Greg did, is rather disingenuous).
Re: Controversial Posted Feb 1, 2011 14:09 UTC (Tue) by jospoortvliet (subscriber, #33164) [Link]
Those numbers don't make much sense - most of Novell doesn't have anything to do with SUSE. The SUSE labs have about 500 employees, I believe - then there is some marketing and sales. That is surely 5-6 times what Canonical has, in total - but far from 130 vs 4100.
Disclaimer: I work for SUSE/Novell.
|
|||||||||||||