| |||||||||||||
Ext4 to be standard for Fedora 11, Btrfs also included (heise online)Ext4 to be standard for Fedora 11, Btrfs also included (heise online)Posted Jan 26, 2009 17:29 UTC (Mon) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639)In reply to: Ext4 to be standard for Fedora 11, Btrfs also included (heise online) by nix Parent article: Ext4 to be standard for Fedora 11, Btrfs also included (heise online)
Linux isn't developed on paid time? Noone spends time contributing to the linux kernel while on the clock for some corporate entity?
hmm.
-jef
(Log in to post comments)
Ext4 to be standard for Fedora 11, Btrfs also included (heise online) Posted Jan 26, 2009 22:29 UTC (Mon) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
Linux didn't start as a paid project, which is *exactly* what you
were 'hmmm'ing about with regard to upstart.
Ext4 to be standard for Fedora 11, Btrfs also included (heise online) Posted Jan 26, 2009 23:27 UTC (Mon) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]
Yes you are right, apologizes for the last comment as it was reading what you wrote in the wrong context.
Yes "Originally developed" was the phrase used. So yes I was hmm'ing about Canonical's role there. Why am I hmm'ing? Because I was under the impression that this was a Canonical developed codebase. Why was I under that impression?
My reading of http://upstart.ubuntu.com/wiki/CopyrightAssignment
The developer even talks about the copyright assignment to Canonical here:
Saying its the same assignment required by bzr, and again my understanding is that bzr was originally developed on Canonical's dime. This doesn't prove that Canonical paid for the original Upstart development time, but its what I took away from the requiring the Canonical copyright assignment.
And there's nothing inherently wrong with the copyright assignment either. If the original developer wants to sign over copyright assignment to Canonical and give Canonical the power to re-license the codebase on whatever terms it sees fits as a corporate entity, even if the codebase originated on volunteer time, that's totally within his rights to do.
Also my previous reading of
specifically lists the original developer as a Canonical employee instead of just a Ubuntu community member and that again implied to me that it was a Canonical development.
Why does it matter? I fully expect that the History of Ubuntu to be a category on Jeopardy in ten years so I want to make sure I get all the trivia correct.
-jef
Ext4 to be standard for Fedora 11, Btrfs also included (heise online) Posted Jan 27, 2009 5:34 UTC (Tue) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]
Please could you shut up about Canonical/Ubuntu? You're an embarrassment to Fedora with your behaviour here
Ext4 to be standard for Fedora 11, Btrfs also included (heise online) Posted Jan 27, 2009 6:50 UTC (Tue) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]
Sadly I'm also an embarrassment to my parents too.
Look I didn't bring it up, I was just expressing the fact that the assertion that Upstart was initially a volunteer effort without Canonical backing seemed odd. If I were angling to beat up Canonical about it, I'd be on the other side of the discussion, trying to argue that this is an example of Canonical not contributing...which the exact opposite of what I thought the situation was.
And point of fact, another person has also chimed in that the original assertion is false. Unlike most everyone else, I've putting my opinion in context by citing the reference material which influenced how I formed that opinion. It would have been nice if the original assertion and come with an authoritative reference. Are you okay with people making unsupported assertions and treating them like facts? I'm more than happy to be shown an authoritative source material that Canonical didn't pay for the development time for Upstart, but until then I'm giving Canonical the benefit of the doubt.
-jef
Ext4 to be standard for Fedora 11, Btrfs also included (heise online) Posted Jan 27, 2009 7:35 UTC (Tue) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]
Jef,
I have no doubt that you believe you're arguing objectively and in good faith, on important questions regarding Canonical.
However, it's completely missing the point: You are a prominent member of the Fedora community (possibly even an officer of it of some sort, I don't know). It reflects very badly on you - and anybody you represent, by extension - when you wage a bad-mouthing campaign against rivals on forums. However well-founded your bad-mouthing might be doesn't matter[1].
Your socio-political standing means it is NOT YOUR PLACE to launch such direct criticisms. Rather make them indirectly by promoting those *positive* aspects of your distro which contrast with what you feel is lacking in others. E.g. "More developers get paid to work on Fedora", or whatever your point is. Leave any direct criticism to 3rd parties (e.g. LWN editors) who have at least semblence of impartiality.
Please, please stop..
1. On the flip-side: if it's not well-founded, it reflects even more poorly on you. Though I suspect many people now ignore any of your comments containing the words "Canonical" or "Ubuntu"..
Ext4 to be standard for Fedora 11, Btrfs also included (heise online) Posted Jan 27, 2009 8:02 UTC (Tue) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]
I know my place... my place is in the kitchen...barefoot.
-jef
Ext4 to be standard for Fedora 11, Btrfs also included (heise online) Posted Jan 29, 2009 14:18 UTC (Thu) by hummassa (subscriber, #307) [Link]
> Your socio-political standing means it is NOT YOUR PLACE to launch such direct criticisms.
I hadn't noticed that Fedora was in a state of war, or any kind of emergency that precludes its members, albeit high-standing ones, of criticizing it.
Lucky Debian, in which _really_ high-standing ones can criticize the project at will and with impunity.
Meh.
Ext4 to be standard for Fedora 11, Btrfs also included (heise online) Posted Jan 27, 2009 23:12 UTC (Tue) by cry_regarder (subscriber, #50545) [Link]
Child: Mommy Mommy! The teacher is picking on me again!
Mom: What about?
Child: Not doing my homework!
Mom: Did you do your homework?
Child: Ummm. No...
Mom: Well?
|
|||||||||||||