Thanks for making my argument [LWN.net]

Thanks for making my argument

Posted Mar 6, 2013 17:12 UTC (Wed) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091)
In reply to: Thanks for making my argument by rahulsundaram
Parent article: Canonical reveals plans to launch Mir display server (The H)

It is true that your list did not include Poettering, but why? He is clearly badmouthing Mir (comparing to some engineering disasters, not very ingeniously as it happens), he offers no valid technical points, he is a Red Hat employee. I am not obsessed with him, but I think he employs dirty tactics in his fight for systemd and against Upstart. You have still not refuted this point other than substracted this particular person from the argument, for some reason. That is intellectually dishonest IMHO.

Let us leave him aside; another Red Hat employee (David Airlie) also badmouthed Canonical without offering any valid technical points, as quoted above (saying they don't have competent technical people). Other people expressed their opinions, in a mostly polite form, and with valid technical reasons; Airlie only made baseless accusations (such as lamenting the lack of source code, which was not true) and silly jabs (Jumping Sharks).

That is just one random Google+ thread, there are many other examples that I have linked above. I am not in the mood to curate any more examples for you.

(Log in to post comments)

Thanks for making my argument

Posted Mar 6, 2013 17:44 UTC (Wed) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]

I have already refuted this point already by telling you two things

1) Lennart's dislike for Canonical is not based on his organizational affiliation. It has a much longer history.

2) it has nothing to do with the current discussion

David's points were already shown to be true. You are however just engaging in the same tactics you seem to be critical of.

Thanks for making my argument

Posted Mar 6, 2013 17:50 UTC (Wed) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link]

I knew this was not worth my time. Anyway, just a clarification: being intellectually dishonest is not the same as being a liar, it is rather to be a self-liar. You choose to see the reality in your own terms and disregard what doesn't fit. Is it intentional or not? I don't know and frankly I am not interested.

Now you will no doubt accuse me of the same, and so on. Bah.

Thanks for making my argument

Posted Mar 6, 2013 17:58 UTC (Wed) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]

So "intellectual dishonesty" is your fancy way of saying, you disagree with me! and of course I do. If you see this thread, the only real badmouthing is from you.

Thanks for making my argument

Posted Mar 6, 2013 20:58 UTC (Wed) by airlied (subscriber, #9104) [Link]

You have to realise I can be a bit of a dick sometimes.

http://airlied.livejournal.com/76828.html

I summed up my thoughts at the time here, in the end C removed the lies, but I'll still bet we'll see them repeated by fanbois across the Internet for years, and developer time will have to be spent correcting them.

I'll update the blog post to mention that they have removed the original source of the technical untruths.

The thing is if you think this is was a purely technical decision at Canonical's end you are already sucked into their event horizon, sometimes you have to realise technical isn't the game that you are being played in and address it as such.

Thanks for making my argument

Posted Mar 6, 2013 21:32 UTC (Wed) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link]

Of course I don't think it's a purely technical decision from Canonical. Also, I don't necessarily think it is a good decision, either for them or for Linux as a whole. But I do think that many good things can come out of it: new ideas, new code, encouragement for Wayland devs to finish their job.

As to the downside, there may be bad consequences, but I don't see how we may end up with three (or four!) different, incompatible display servers. Either they will be compatible somehow or only one will survive. Hey, even GNOME and KDE have agreed to a lot of standards, making our life easier.

Thanks for making my argument

Posted Mar 6, 2013 23:36 UTC (Wed) by HelloWorld (guest, #56129) [Link]

> But I do think that many good things can come out of it: new ideas, new code, encouragement for Wayland devs to finish their job.
Name one reason why new ideas and code can't be created by extending Wayland.

> As to the downside, there may be bad consequences, but I don't see how we may end up with three (or four!) different, incompatible display servers. Either they will be compatible somehow or only one will survive. Hey, even GNOME and KDE have agreed to a lot of standards, making our life easier.
Yeah right. Gtk applications look alien on Qt-based Desktops to this very day. If anything, the Gnome/KDE history is a cautionary tale.