Shuttleworth: Losing graciously
Shuttleworth: Losing graciously
Posted Feb 15, 2014 19:48 UTC (Sat) by HelloWorld (guest, #56129)In reply to: Shuttleworth: Losing graciously by thomas.poulsen
Parent article: Shuttleworth: Losing graciously
> As I remember history, he wanted to use Wayland:
> http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/551
Yes, he made some friendly noises at the beginning. And then he didn't do *anything* to contribute to Wayland at all. Canonical developers didn't engage in protocol design or requirements engineering, graphics driver development, toolkit porting or anything else that would be remotely helpful.
Instead, he announced Mir, which doesn't solve any problems Wayland doesn't solve, has a CLA and contributes to the fragmentation that is already holding Linux back. In total, I think Canonical does more harm than good to the Linux ecosystem.
> http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/551
Yes, he made some friendly noises at the beginning. And then he didn't do *anything* to contribute to Wayland at all. Canonical developers didn't engage in protocol design or requirements engineering, graphics driver development, toolkit porting or anything else that would be remotely helpful.
Instead, he announced Mir, which doesn't solve any problems Wayland doesn't solve, has a CLA and contributes to the fragmentation that is already holding Linux back. In total, I think Canonical does more harm than good to the Linux ecosystem.
Posted Feb 16, 2014 1:11 UTC (Sun)
by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389)
[Link]
Maybe the development side, but certainly not the user side. How many people have been exposed to Linux only through Canonical? Who would have done something similar in a similar timeframe? My guess: no one.
Shuttleworth: Losing graciously
> In total, I think Canonical does more harm than good to the Linux ecosystem.