Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for December 5, 2013
Deadline scheduling: coming soon?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 27, 2013
ACPI for ARM?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 21, 2013
a bad precedent?
Posted Sep 19, 2008 2:28 UTC (Fri) by sbishop (guest, #33061)
If flat out telling a distribution's core developers to quit isn't an attack on that distribution, then I can't imagine what _would_ qualify...
Posted Sep 19, 2008 5:31 UTC (Fri) by bronson (subscriber, #4806)
He did say that if your current employer discourages you from contributing your work back upstream that you should quit, yes. Is there anything wrong with this sentiment? It applies to Via, TI, and all these other pseudo-open-source sweatshops that dump an unlicensed almost-working ball of code on some FTP server and disappear. Is this an accurate description of Canonical? Probably not.
Posted Sep 19, 2008 11:05 UTC (Fri) by grantingram (guest, #18390)
Did GregKH "flat out tell" Canonical employees to quit?
Well almost... I was quite astonished when I read his slides! The whole thing strikes me as really rather unpleasant. I'm really not sure what the aim of the talk was other than to generate heat. Perhaps it was cold....
Posted Sep 19, 2008 11:48 UTC (Fri) by AlexHudson (subscriber, #41828)
The Lightbulb Moment!
Posted Sep 19, 2008 15:19 UTC (Fri) by grantingram (guest, #18390)
I'd forgotten about that - suddenly it all starts to make a bit more sense... a sort of flame war conducted over twenty three months.
Posted Sep 19, 2008 15:46 UTC (Fri) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639)
And in this specific case, it could be chalked up to a "reap what you sow" moment.
That was a pretty aggressive move on Shuttleworth's part. Taking negative public sentiment, and using it to bolster your own company's interests by calling out another company for taking advantage of thousands of programmers and contributors. Who would have thought that other entities would replicate Shuttleworth's aggressive tactics at community manipulation. Mark should have patented that idea, then he wouldn't have to worry about competitors doing the exact same thing to him on down the line.
I think if Shuttleworth decided to take a step back from the public eye, and let the technical leads at Canonical who are actually doing the work do the bulk of the communication about any Canonical activity...that could help reorient relations. He would be better of letting the technical people inside Canonical lead with action, and following up on that technical leadership by talking about it publicly. Instead he spends a lot of time talking about what Canonical will do or what Canonical is thinking about. He primes the pump, he stokes the flames...he just doesn't realize whose pumps and flames he's priming and stroking.
Posted Sep 19, 2008 21:45 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds