| |||||||||||||
LPC: Fitting into the kernel ecosystemLPC: Fitting into the kernel ecosystemPosted Sep 18, 2008 15:27 UTC (Thu) by tle@holymonkey.com (guest, #47821)Parent article: LPC: Fitting into the kernel ecosystem
An objective listing of the numbers would have been fine, but the negativity expressed in Greg's presentation is disturbing. The editor (who usually isn't afraid to inject his own opinion) is being unfair by reporting on the "picking on Canonical" without pointing out that it is plain wrong.
All Ubuntu components are released under an open source license. Patches and bug reports are actively pushed upstream. They should be praised for the contributions they make to the kernel and other projects, and encouraged to contribute more.
Instead of putting down organizations who contribute only a little, please focus your energies on praising those that contribute more. Any contribution should be gracefully accepted.
Cheers,
(Log in to post comments)
LPC: Fitting into the kernel ecosystem Posted Sep 18, 2008 16:12 UTC (Thu) by tzafrir (subscriber, #11501) [Link]
If everything works so well, how is it, then, that the bugs and troubles Ubuntu's user-base generate so few upstream patches? At least in those plumbing packages. Is it because they don't fix problems or because they don't forward fixes upstream?
A I pointed out elsewhere in this thread: I don't think Ubuntu is required by some ethical standards to contribute. It should make sense for Ubuntu for economical reasons to do so. While I appreciate RedHat, Novell and others, I don't suppose they employ so many developers just for the PR value.
LPC: Fitting into the kernel ecosystem Posted Sep 18, 2008 17:37 UTC (Thu) by tle@holymonkey.com (guest, #47821) [Link]
> At least in those plumbing packages. Is it because they don't fix problems or because they don't forward fixes upstream?
I agree that the discussion should focus on a distribution's _process_ of bug reporting and submission of patches to upstream.
Ubuntu does all of their bug reporting, patch submission, and upstream reporting in the open. Just like any open source project, don't just complain about something not working. At the VERY least, look at the process, and point out where it is failing.
LPC: Fitting into the kernel ecosystem Posted Sep 18, 2008 18:55 UTC (Thu) by mdz@debian.org (subscriber, #14112) [Link]
Users' bugs and troubles don't generate patches: developers do. Ubuntu has millions of users, and dozens of developers (only some of whom work for Canonical). We receive several thousand bug reports per month, for the entire free software stack.
We focus primarily on fixing integration and packaging problems (which are our unique responsibility), followed by the most critical problems we inherit from upstream. This is similar to how Debian works, though the scales involved are dramatically different.
LPC: Fitting into the kernel ecosystem Posted Sep 18, 2008 20:44 UTC (Thu) by hppnq (guest, #14462) [Link] The editor (who usually isn't afraid to inject his own opinion) is being unfair by reporting on the "picking on Canonical" without pointing out that it is plain wrong. See this Linux foundation paper and you will notice that Greg and your editor cooperated on the research that (very probably, no specific source is mentioned) produced these statistics. It surprised me to not see a reference to this paper, I must admit. Especially since it raises a specific point that many here seem to miss in their eagerness to shoot from the hip: that Linux kernel development does not really need the contributions of even more companies. So why the commotion? We could be having a nice discussion about whether we had not better call this ecosystem "GNU/Linux". ;-)
|
|||||||||||||