Canonical Ltd is a private company?

[breakdaze]

I guess Canonical is a for profit company? What was the impetus to start up a company that rolls out GNU/Linux distros? If it is for profit, does that mean the moderators on here have paid positions? Do the developers get paid to code, and update the man pages? The Ubuntu landscape seems to have a lot of support, which is nice. Is Ubuntu source code pretty close to Debian at this time? It's nice when the man pages reflect the current code base and feature set. How accurate and up to date are the man pages? Does each code author or upstream author maintain the man pages for each package? Accurate documentation should be as important as code correctness, as well as code comments, IMHO. Programming courses I've taken hammer on this subject. Good work folks!

[#&thj^%]

In a Guardian interview in May 2008, Shuttleworth said that Canonical's business model was service provision and that Canonical was not yet close to profitability.
Canonical stated that it would wait three to five years to become profitable. Shuttleworth regarded Canonical as positioning itself as demand for services related to free software rose.

This strategy has been compared to Red Hat's business strategies in the 1990s.[20] In an early-2009 New York Times article, Shuttleworth said that Canonical's revenue was "creeping" towards US$30 million, the company's break-even point.[21]
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_%28company%29
He did want everyone to have free option for a workable OS
EDIT: This may surprise you, Canonical Ltd. Archived from the original on 21 August 2010. Retrieved 20 August 2012. "We've come a long way since our launch in 2004. We now have over 800 staff in more than 42 countries, and offices in London, Austin, Boston, Taipei, Montreal, Shanghai, São Paulo and the Isle of Man."
Cheers Mark

[QIII]

No, we don't get paid. We are volunteers.

Man pages are written by upstream developers. If that's not Canonical, then the man pages are not written by Canonical.

Canonical makes its money through service contracts. The freely distributed OS itself makes them no revenue.

[#&thj^%]

No, we don't get paid. We are volunteers.

So you don't count the delicious pastry's I send weekly? :lolflag:

[guiverc]

I'm involved with Ubuntu News, so see different things about Canonical, profit, goals etc. but I really don't pay much attention to it as I'm not that interested in it. Canonical do make a profit most of the time, however a lot of their income comes from telephone support, which includes closed-source software on non-GNU/Linux platforms as well. Ubuntu is not the only purpose of Canonical.

Most of the software comes from upstream; and that includes documentation.

Many Ubuntu devs are also Debian devs, as it makes more sense packaging what we want upstream & have it flow through to us (ie. package via Debian) as both benefit, and problems such as them going out of sync doesn't occur.

I'm involved with a flavor (Lubuntu), and currently our desktop is ahead of Debian; as Debian was in freeze at the time we were working on our last release so packaging was done only for us putting us ahead (later software) than upstream Debian.. We're currently waiting for our replacement from upstream Debian devs who are now doing their & our replacement (newer) desktop. We (Lubuntu) have our own user-documentation (largely manual; some pages on our discourse/forum) but the details seen onscreen are mostly just upstream's doco that comes with the source themselves.

You seem to like documentation; I'd recommend you read some of the posts by Ubuntu's new lead on documentation. eg.

https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/ways-to-improve-documentation/23478/10

He has written a lot in recent months (or since his hire late last year) which has included many resources to help community members improve with regards documentation. Much of Daniele Procida's posts are on the Ubuntu Community Hub.

FYI: Most devs I interact with do this in their spare time, ie. it's a passion. Yes some are paid a wage by Canonical or other companies etc, but with wages come company led goals, targets & directives - and in my experience they give off a different 'vibe' when it's their own time, to specific goals of their daily job.

[#&thj^%]

Nice addition guiverc, I really like his thoughts

It’s important for community members to have their say in all of the above. However it’s really clear to me that both within Canonical and in the wider Ubuntu community documentation is valued by people, and that there’s a strong desire to do it better, and I hope that I can help to achieve that.
Bigger Task than what you would first think>>>this is huge.

[QIII]

So you don't count the delicious pastry's I send weekly? :lolflag:

I'm doubling my fee!

[#&thj^%]

Alright, only cause your you. ;)
I'm "steal" getting off cheap.

[breakdaze]

Thanks for the information, it's very interesting. 800 employees, that's pretty good. I knew they made their money on services, but I thought it was mostly paid Ubuntu support. I didn't quite realize they do other software. Yes, coding and GNU/Linux are fun. I like open source software, and getting under the hood if necessary or just to make the code do what I want, although I'm a novice programmer. There are so many platforms for the information these days. My favorite are man pages, which GNU is good at. The Ubuntu Wiki is sometimes out of date, or has examples from older versions of Ubuntu, but I guess that's totally community driven. I will look over what he edited, regarding this post - https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/mkusb-iso2usb-win32diskimager-isoboot-wiki-pages/23579. I have a little experience messing around with GNU GRUB, and the various ways of making install or live media. It was flaky back when grub2 (as people call GNU GRUB) was in beta, like around version 1.97, but it is much better now. People complained it was a step backward from GRUB 1, but I guess GNU had their reasons (the Multiboot specification). By the way, I never tried the GNU HURD kernel swarm, have you? I like the idea of it as opposed to the monolitic Linux kernel. However, we can't deny the popularity of the Linux kernel, thanks Linus!

Thanks for the link to the discussion about documentation on discourse. That's great that there will be an effort to train people. Impressive for a free operating system. It is interesting how far GNU/Linux in general has come. The monolitic kernel, with all the drivers, the core GNU programs, and the raft of packages for applications to suit almost every need.

I'm old and I remember my friends in the early 90's saying, have you tried Linux, and I was like, "what's that?" Back then things were just getting started with the internet opening to the public. I was amazed to have an email address, and be able to email a friend at a university. I had a dial-up connection to a non-profit running a SunOS shared system, and my favorite shell was C-Shell, but people thought I was crazy, and thought sh or bash was better. Most of the information and discussion was on UseNet, as there was no forums, and web browsing was text based using Lynx. My friends who could afford it eventually paid for a PPP connection, and using NCSA Mosaic, could browse the web graphically! Mind blowing compared to the BBS scene. For better or worse, the net has become more commercial. Like AskUbuntu, which is run by the for profit Stack Exchange. I find it kind of strange, where there are "badges"... honestly I find it quite silly. I'm not sure if that platform is for me. I think forums are more my speed.

I like trying all different OS, and one I really admire is OpenBSD. I also like the way they do their documentation. The code base is probably a lot smaller though. I didn't have a computer for a few years, but in the last couple of years I have. I recently got a surplus Acer Veriton CX2610 from 2011. Interestingly, there are two BIOS versions, Windows and Linux. I'm not sure why, but I left the stock BIOS on it for now. I will probably try the Linux one though. That's neat though, that they would have a specific Linux BIOS. I've been running the Lubuntu 20.04.3 Live USB with persistence, but I'm going to soon install the Lubuntu 20.04.4 onto a used 160Gb sata II SSD, and see how it goes. But yeah, I like the Unix-like OS like GNU/Linux or the various BSD OS. I have a more powerful PC also, and I plan to do what I did a few years ago, multiboot Windows, Various Linux, OpenBSD, and whatever else... probably FreeBSD. Seems I'm more interested in the OS than using application software sometimes, ha ha. I do like making home servers, like a Squid Proxy Cache on an OpenBSD system. It used to make browsing hot spots more secure too, when I routed my traffic through it. These days with https, things are much better for privacy.

Have I digressed? :)

Thanks to all the volunteers and coders who do it for free, and on their own time! I really appreciate everyone.

cheers

[zebra2]

I'm glad someone tossed some pastry into this thread. Everyone has to eat! Since the whole world runs on Linux it would be delusional thinking to deny that billions of dollars are circulating as a result of Linux. Linus Trovalds who owns the Linux kernel makes 1.5 million a year and the Linux Foundation has a 50M per year budget. The fact that these Linux distros are free to download and use just keeps them relevant. The worlds corporations spend big bucks to keep Linux functional for themselves and their interests. The company that I work for has twenty thousand employees and they all eat and they all get paid. Just follow the money trail. If it is free, it is at someone else's efforts and expense. I've owned a few businesses over the years and I used registered paid software and systems to make my money.

[breakdaze]

Good point! Obviously commercial GNU/Linux (I'm going to keep saying GNU Linux, because the core utilities are GNU!) is huge with servers and many people make money working for companies to sell and support this code. IBM, etc.

Unfortunately some projects haven't gotten the support they deserve. Like OpenBSD which has produced many important code bases; PF (packet filter), Open SSH, etc. Because of the nice BSD license, Apple, Microsoft, Android and others just take the code , modify it, and make it part of their proprietary OSes. Thus most funding has been from user donations, buying the CDs, etc.

From Wikipedia, "However, De Raadt expressed concern about the asymmetry of funding: "I think that contributions should have come first from the vendors, secondly from the corporate users, and thirdly from individual users. But the response has been almost entirely the opposite, with almost a 15-to-1 dollar ratio in favor of the little people. Thanks a lot, little people!"[85]"

[QIII]

This is not to start a flame war, but Linux is the term used almost exclusively around here. Let me impart what is my opinion, and it is opinion only. I have no power of enforcement. :)

Would you call your home a "hammer house" because hammers were used in its construction? Would you call it a "water heater house" because it has a water heater? Would you call it an "oven house" because it has an oven? Tools used to build it and the amenities it contains do not rate a term like "DISHWASHER/House".

Canonical LTD refers to Ubuntu as a Linux distribution. Most of us call it Linux. Linus thinks the term "GNU/Linux" used as a generality is ridiculous (https://theleftcoastgeek.net/index.php/general/7-linux-or-gnu-linux?start=1), although he does say that the developers of distros have every right to call it what they want. The now disgraced RMS comically claimed to have developed Linux (https://theleftcoastgeek.net/index.php/general/7-linux-or-gnu-linux) and was subsequently shouted down.The Linux Foundation is not the "GNU/Linux Foundation".

While there is absolutely nothing wrong with using the term GNU/Linux when the community you are in uses it, most Ubuntu users would just call it Linux. Most Linux users would just call it Linux. Linus and the Linux Foundation would just call it Linux.

[TheFu]

Seems you are looking at Ubuntu like only 1 organization is responsible for the Ubuntu distributions. That is not how Unix/Linux work.


I guess Canonical is a for profit company? What was the impetus to start up a company that rolls out GNU/Linux distros?
Use Google.


If it is for profit, does that mean the moderators on here have paid positions?
No. Everyone one here are unpaid volunteers with ZERO special remuneration. Every volunteer has different reasons for posting here. Some are truly altruistic and some are for other reasons. Reputation is about all we have here.


Do the developers get paid to code, and update the man pages? For the 5% of code that Canonical actually creates, their developers are paid employees. You'll never see any Canonical developers here - except in very limited periods for extremely specific reasons. Sometimes a Canonical Community organizer will be here, but they seem to find other things to do quickly and stop engaging.


The Ubuntu landscape seems to have a lot of support, which is nice. Is Ubuntu source code pretty close to Debian at this time? The license for each package is self contained. Software licenses matter. Nearly all used in Ubuntu distros will be GPL v2/v3 or LGPL. Some will be more open licenses like BSD, MIT, Apache or Perl licenses. Most documentation will be under a CC license.


It's nice when the man pages reflect the current code base and feature set. How accurate and up to date are the man pages? Always use the manpages included in the package installed. If you have to use google to find a manpage, assume 90% accuracy. Manpages are generally accurate, but there can be bugs from time to time in some utilities. Canonical doesn't alter manpages for code they don't also modify.


Does each code author or upstream author maintain the man pages for each package? The project team does. A project team may be 1 person who doesn't create a manpage or it could be 200+ people with a separate documentation team.


Accurate documentation should be as important as code correctness, as well as code comments, IMHO. Programming courses I've taken hammer on this subject. Good work folks!
While I agree, not all project teams do. When I was coding professionally, updating the documentation was as important as making clean, accurate, code that met requirements. Our documentation was reviewed along with the code, designs and test scenarios - in a formal way. There were at least 2 separate formal reviews with at least 8 people seeing even the most trivial modifications. Large changes would be split up into many different reviews and 50+ people would be involved in the reviews.

Alas, that isn't how non-paid developers work. They volunteer their time and do what they like, ignoring what they don't like. It is human nature.

I code all the time still, but don't want the hassles of dealing with other users, so I don't release any of my non-trivial code. That's my right. Now, if someone wants to pay me $150/hr, I would happily create commercial code with documentation to the best of my ability.

IMHO.

[breakdaze]

Sure, I call it Linux for convenience a lot too, like in conversation, but then, that's just the kernel. It's easier to say Linux, but I like to remember the core tools are GNU with a Linux kernel. Please read here https://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.en.html

Straight from Richard Stallman.

So, go ahead and remove all the GNU and see how the house stands. It's not the hammer, it's at least the foundation of the house, or maybe the frame. I'm not going to care, however, if others use Linux and not GNU/Linux. I'm just being me.

Also, about OpenBSD, they also made OpenSSH. Great code, so I really appreciate that team.

Documentation just makes it easier for end users to make sense of and use software. I guess you're saying most people who wrote most of the code in these distros are unpaid. And not all projects care about good documentation. But above in a link someone at Canonical was thinking about improving it. If they sell support and such, documentation is a good thing to refer admits and users to.

I understand though, volunteers and stuff don't have to do anything, which I get. It's great that Open Source is written by so many people.

Nice chatting. :)

[QIII]

Interestingly, I'm quite aware of the link you provided -- it is is exactly what I was talking about in my blog. I've been in this game for I reckon 47 years now. It is my considered opinion that RMS had it exactly backwards.

Personally, I try not to step in that sort of thing when I am out working with our livestock.

[breakdaze]

LOL. Oops, I didn't read your post. I see your point. That eventually the kernel would get what it needed by people developing the Unix like tools one way or another. I guess RMS was just trying to say that their project put some real effort and thought into these Unix like tools. But yeah, whatever. Linux is fine and dandy by me.

You know, come to think of it, really the original credit for the Unix like tools are the creators of Unix! Yes, proprietary, but without that OS, there would be nothing to imitate. So, we all really owe the Bell Labs team for creating AT&T Unix. Thompson and Ritchie and others. Of course they made C also, based on B.

let's leave it there. :)

Hey, I have an old Unix Shell Programming book, and it said the Korn Shell was destined to become the Shell of choice. Don't know about Unix, but certainly not true for Linux!

[QIII]

"GNU/Linux" is a fine term if it floats your boat. :)

[grahammechanical]

In my uneducated opinion we would all be using the Gnu Herd operating system if RMS had been more willing to accept code contributions from other programmers in the way that Linus Torvalds did with his experimental project modifying Minix.

Regarding the original subject of this thread, let us not forget the Ubuntu Foundation. Read about it under the heading at the bottom of this page:

https://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=2118681&seqNum=5

Regards

[breakdaze]

@VMC Yes, I tried and used Ubuntu in 2005. I can't remember for sure, but I believe I started with the Hoary Hedgehog version. There was a time that you could request 10 free CDs, which I did, and I handed them out to friends.