User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Canonical? No.

Canonical? No.

Posted Jun 22, 2009 20:14 UTC (Mon) by asdlfiui788b (guest, #58839)
In reply to: Canonical? by mikov
Parent article: Developer statistics for 2.6.30

Canonical does not contribute upstream to Linux, at all. Whatsoever. They just take what they can scrap up from Debian, and make money on it.


(Log in to post comments)

Canonical? No.

Posted Jun 22, 2009 22:32 UTC (Mon) by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239) [Link]

It's entirely untrue that Canonical contribute nothing to upstream. It can certainly be argued that their contributions are small relative to their profile and developer count, but that's not the same thing.

Canonical? No.

Posted Jun 29, 2009 20:17 UTC (Mon) by job (guest, #670) [Link]

You mean they lose money on it. :)

I will save any judgement on Canonical or any other company until they have black figures. Until then, the process is not yet sustainable and matters little in the long run.

Canonical? No.

Posted Aug 12, 2009 19:22 UTC (Wed) by snadrus (guest, #60224) [Link]

Important point!
If [their organization cannot persist (which is true if they live in the red)] then
anyone requesting more from them could at-best see short-term benefits until they run out of cash reserves.

They've enhanced the open source desktop with Upstart & invited more independent developers to open source with Quickly and Launchpad.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds