PDA

View Full Version : the Kernel's -stable maintainer rips on Ubuntu...



earthpigg
December 4th, 2009, 12:41 AM
It should be recalled that Greg Kroah-Hartman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Kroah-Hartman) is an employee of one of Ubuntu's perceived competitors, Novell.

The video is from about a year ago, but I found it interesting.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3385088017824733336&ei=N-QXS_D0CqPKqwK1sZzpDg#

doas777
December 4th, 2009, 12:56 AM
an interesting interpretation on the classic "Opening joke" for a presentation.

in his defense, you have to know your audience, and these are people that have little interest in making linux usable for the masses. they are server vendors. and ubuntu is getting kind of a bad rep in the hardcore community. partly because its simpler/easier, partly because it brings in non-techs and folks with no formal training, and partly just because of it's growing popularity.

canonical is a packager, and their focus is the package, rather than the individual parts. their goal is to bring it to the masses, which isnt popular with the folks that want to be differant. I'll admit, if ubuntu hits a certian popularity level, I will prolly head to a more techie distro, or even bsd.

RiceMonster
December 4th, 2009, 01:03 AM
He makes a good point. Canonical should contribute more to the upstream projects they take advantage of. Gentoo and Debian, who consist entirely of unpaid volunteers are contributing more. Even Mandriva is contributing more, and they have less money and employees. It really goes to show. They should take note at the way Red Hat and Novell are contributing, and all you have to do is watch the video to find out why.

I'd like to hear if Canonical is contributing back to GNOME or KDE (I've never seen any statistics). That would be a good start if they are.

Also, I'd like to point out that I think it's irrelevant that he's an employee of Novell. The real competitor to target would be something like Red Hat or Oracle, so I don't think he has any corporate agenda, because if anything he makes Red Hat look better than Novell here.

Frak
December 4th, 2009, 01:41 AM
He makes a good point. Canonical should contribute more to the upstream projects they take advantage of. Gentoo and Debian, who consist entirely of unpaid volunteers are contributing more. Even Mandriva is contributing more, and they have less money and employees. It really goes to show. They should take note at the way Red Hat and Novell are contributing, and all you have to do is watch the video to find out why.

That's sad on so many levels.

Keyper7
December 4th, 2009, 01:50 AM
Canonical should contribute more to the upstream projects they take advantage of.

Let's be fair here, the presentation focuses just on the kernel. I'd search for more general statistics before giving such a general statement. I don't know how much Canonical contributes to desktop projects, but I'd guess it's a lot more. Plus, while it's true that giving money is easier than giving code when you are a millionaire, things like Mark being the first patron of KDE should be considered before spreading the idea that Canonical is a leech, like some people do.

JDShu
December 4th, 2009, 01:57 AM
Let's be fair here, the presentation focuses just on the kernel. I'd search for more general statistics before giving such a general statement. I don't know how much Canonical contributes to desktop projects, but I'd guess it's a lot more. Plus, while it's true that giving money is easier than giving code when you are a millionaire, things like Mark being the first patron of KDE should be considered before spreading the idea that Canonical is a leech, like some people do.

He actually mentions x.org as well, and there are again very few patches submitted.

Still, its really not as big an issue as people seem to think it is. Canonical makes Ubuntu, which is/was the easiest distribution to set up for noobs. Even if they are piggybacking on Debian, the fact remains that this makes using "Debian" a lot easier for people who do not otherwise have the ability.

doas777
December 4th, 2009, 01:59 AM
it actually seemed like he was calling out cannonical for claiming to contribute to the kernel, and not doing so up to his expectations.

JDShu
December 4th, 2009, 02:01 AM
True, but he makes digs at CentOS as well so maybe theres something more.

Frak
December 4th, 2009, 02:02 AM
Let's be fair here, the presentation focuses just on the kernel. I'd search for more general statistics before giving such a general statement. I don't know how much Canonical contributes to desktop projects, but I'd guess it's a lot more. Plus, while it's true that giving money is easier than giving code when you are a millionaire, things like Mark being the first patron of KDE should be considered before spreading the idea that Canonical is a leech, like some people do.
They pretty much aren't giving back to anybody. This is what I found on the Canonical contributions page:

* Debian
* Zope 3
* KDE
* GNOME
* Twisted
* Python
* GNU
* and, of course, Linux

Except they don't really help Debian, nor Linux, or much of anything else, so I really doubt they are doing anything of worth to give back.

joey-elijah
December 4th, 2009, 02:05 AM
it actually seemed like he was calling out cannonical for claiming to contribute to the kernel, and not doing so up to his expectations.

There's kind of a double standard used by some people critical of Ubuntu/Canonical.

Canonical and the Ubuntu teams' priority is Ubuntu. Simple. There seems to be an expectation that because Ubuntu is popular or/and that Canonical/mark have money that therefore this should be lavished on every part of open-source tech that Ubuntu uses. I'm sure Arch or UltimateLinuxOMG!Edition or whoever don't have these expectations levelled at them, but it seems Ubuntu is fair game because it's popular.

AFAIK Ubuntu and Mark and Canonical contribute more than enough (way more tbh) than would probably be considered reasonable. I'm sure there are areas where more could be done, but sometimes the up-streaming process can make it difficult itself.

Keyper7
December 4th, 2009, 02:09 AM
He actually mentions x.org as well, and there are again very few patches submitted.

I wouldn't consider X.org truly as a desktop project. Much closer to the desktop than to the kernel, sure, but it's still quite low level.

Anyway, I once saw a good response from a Ubuntu developer about those things. I can't seem to find it right now, but it was something in the lines of "we want to improve Ubuntu and we are not forking the projects we use, so of course we contribute upstream: it's the only thing we can do". It's a little like when Linus Torvalds responded to the accusations that the kernel devs only care about servers... he said something like "uh... we use Linux on the desktop ourselves, it would be stupid to not care about it".

I also remember Jo Shields (I think) stating that all Ubuntu devs he works with agree that the only path to push Ubuntu forward is contributing to Debian and contributing upstream.

Of course, this does not prove anything, but at least is not something in the lines of "Ubuntu contributes by bringing more users", which would be a very weak statement.

RiceMonster
December 4th, 2009, 02:12 AM
I'm sure Arch or UltimateLinuxOMG!Edition or whoever don't have these expectations levelled at them, but it seems Ubuntu is fair game because it's popular.

I expect business that make Linux distros to contribute back. Not completely community base distros made up of unpaid volunteers to give back. Yet, there are still community distros like Gentoo and Debian giving more back.


but sometimes the up-streaming process can make it difficult itself.

Interesting that the such a large number of companies have no difficulty giving back then.

Frak
December 4th, 2009, 02:15 AM
There's kind of a double standard used by some people critical of Ubuntu/Canonical.

Canonical and the Ubuntu teams' priority is Ubuntu. Simple. There seems to be an expectation that because Ubuntu is popular or/and that Canonical/mark have money that therefore this should be lavished on every part of open-source tech that Ubuntu uses. I'm sure Arch or UltimateLinuxOMG!Edition or whoever don't have these expectations levelled at them, but it seems Ubuntu is fair game because it's popular.

AFAIK Ubuntu and Mark and Canonical contribute more than enough (way more tbh) than would probably be considered reasonable. I'm sure there are areas where more could be done, but sometimes the up-streaming process can make it difficult itself.
RedHat's goal is to sell as much software and support as they can. They've come to the conclusion that it is within their best interests to improve Linux and the entire structure as a whole in order to increase profits. They did just that, and a magical thing occured, profits rose. Canonical should see that it is also within their best interests to improve their end of the Linux spectrum.

JDShu
December 4th, 2009, 02:18 AM
Of course, this does not prove anything, but at least is not something in the lines of "Ubuntu contributes by bringing more users", which would be a very weak statement.

This would be a weak argument from the point of view that Ubuntu brings in people to help Linux. On the flip side, I think its a contribution to society where Ubuntu helps people use Linux.