Launchpad.net proprietary?

[WildTangent]

Asimon: if you're so concerned about that statement, why not bring it up at the next Community Council meeting.

-Wild

[xequence]

Asimon: if you're so concerned about that statement, why not bring it up at the next Community Council meeting.

-Wild

Just a random question, but does anyone (except you and a couple people that I guess would know about it, like azz and poofy) accually know what this council thing is, and when they meet, and where? o.O

[poofyhairguy]

Just a random question, but does anyone (except you and a couple people that I guess would know about it, like azz and poofy) accually know what this council thing is, and when they meet, and where? o.O

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CommunityCouncil

[neighborlee]

This is absolutely right, I too encourage people to use Free Software but use propritary software for certain tasks.
But I think there is a difference between 'encouraging' and 'entirely commited to'.


I think this situation is not comparable to the bitkeeper story at all. That situation was completly clear from the start. Once again, my gripe is not about the usage of propritary stuff, but saying Ubuntu is entirely free software commited when this 'entirely' is untrue. Many people are even unaware of the fact that launchpad is propritary!


They had a working free bug tracking alternative before. Now to contribute bug reports I have to use propritary Malone, there is no alternative. With Rosetta there was always the alternative to not use it but make translations upstream.


They should not remove launchpad. Rather they should change a certain statement at ubuntu.com and maybe state some things differently in future talks.

I just learned about this, non OSS aspect of lauchpad, and while sure its clear that some software not open source is used and necessary atm ( if you need certain 'hardware' that is ), it really sends a weird signal, that bugs filed for a freely available OS would be handled by non opensource code, which was written by that same company.

Please no rants about opening a OLD thread, I just found out about it.

Maybe OpenSolaris....wpam begin.

You know this isn't about me, its about opensource..or so I thought, then I find this out.

That is why this whole mono thing was something I wanted nothing to do with and now with ooXML we find those of us not supporting it were probably very much correct. Standards and open source someday will be the hallmark of society.

cheers
nl

[perce]

Is Launchpad distributed at all? if Canonical developed it, and makes it run on Canonical servers, then there is no contradiction: free software principles say that if you distribute some software, you must distribute at certain conditions that empower the user (n particular making the source available and allowing to modify it), but they don't say that you must distribute all software you write.

[samjh]

Canonical merely promotes the use of open source products and supports the development of open source products. There is nothing stated or implied about Canonical excluding closed source products. They do reserve the right to develop proprietary products and use them at will.

[LaRoza]