View Full Version : The impolite Ubuntu
defkewl
June 19th, 2005, 11:32 AM
I've read from debian mailing list how impolite Ubuntu is by coming out of nowhere and just took away all of the hard work done by debian developers and 'sometimes' didn't return back what has been modified by Ubuntu. Not only impolite, but what Ubuntu is doing is threatening debian.
What's most obvious is that Ubuntu is using Xorg in the current release. Ubuntu is by far known as the only debian descendant that uses Xorg, while all the others still uses XFree86 to respect all of the hardwork that has been contributed by debian developers. Even Warren of MEPIS stated that he won't go ahead of Debian.
So what do you guys think about this?
Sslaxx
June 19th, 2005, 11:35 AM
Meaningless to me. I don't care about the technology behind the distro, or what it is derived from, so long as it works. I've never had a problem with Debian, or Ubuntu, and I'll use whichever of them suits me needs best - currently Ubuntu.
As to the politics behind the move... Debian, rightly or wrongly, has been perceived as being behind the times - a perception they're now trying to rectify, it seems.
sapo
June 19th, 2005, 11:52 AM
you are taking it wrong... debian is free to use and modify, and ubuntu is free as well, if debian want some ubuntu modified apps what's the problem in taking the ubuntu source, or participating in the mailling list?
Trickyphillips
June 19th, 2005, 11:56 AM
In the open source world, you have to learn that your own code can be used to beat you. Ubuntu wasn't developed with the intention of stealing members of the Debian community; it just happened to convert a fair amount of people. I hope the Debian community isn't upset with Ubuntu for doing so.
With that said, I refuse to try Debian simply because they don't have message boards, and don't like mailing lists. :razz:
scourge
June 19th, 2005, 11:56 AM
Um, how exactly didn't Ubuntu "return back" what was modified? Isn't it all under GPL? And how is Ubuntu threatening Debian? Sure, it is possible that by being a really good distro Ubuntu threatens the existence of other distros, but Ubuntu isn't making any threats, that's for sure.
Ubuntu is by far known as the only debian descendant that uses Xorg, while all the others still uses XFree86 to respect all of the hardwork that has been contributed by debian developers.
What? Ubuntu is not Debian, there's no need to do everything the "Debian way". It has nothing to do with respect. This is how the Linux world evolves, and this is why we have such a wide range of distributions: you can take the best parts of distro A and combine them with the best parts of distro B. There's a pretty good reason why most major distros switched to Xorg, and I'm glad Ubuntu is one of these progressive distros. Please don't say we don't respect Debian. The Ubuntu developers and users have great respect for Debian.
Trickyphillips
June 19th, 2005, 12:00 PM
Even Warren of MEPIS stated that he won't go ahead of Debian.
Limiting development simply because one group isn't going quickly? Doesn't seem bright. [-X
asimon
June 19th, 2005, 12:49 PM
if debian want some ubuntu modified apps what's the problem in taking the ubuntu source, or participating in the mailling list?
Evidently limited time. I doubt that many package maintainers participate in mailing lists of other distros or regulary look on other distro's bug tracking systems on search for patches.
Some Debian developers blogged that they didn't even knowed that someone modified their package and just wished for better communication. There must have also been cases where such modifications introduced new bugs, for which reports landed in the mail queue of some Debian developer who wasn't responsible for these modifications at all.
Thus I see it mainly as suboptimal communication. Ubuntu is young and surely it will improve with time.
defkewl
June 19th, 2005, 01:30 PM
you are taking it wrong... debian is free to use and modify, and ubuntu is free as well, if debian want some ubuntu modified apps what's the problem in taking the ubuntu source, or participating in the mailling list?
Wouldn't it be better if Ubuntu return something that they take rather than expecting Debian developers taking Ubuntu source ;)
sapo
June 19th, 2005, 01:34 PM
Wouldn't it be better if Ubuntu return something that they take rather than expecting Debian developers taking Ubuntu source ;)
this sounds like that "Ubuntu HAVE to return" and thats not the open source filosophy.
Do you think that everyone that modifies the kernel send a copy of the code to linus torvalds? :roll:
Xian
June 19th, 2005, 01:39 PM
What's most obvious is that Ubuntu is using Xorg in the current release. Ubuntu is by far known as the only debian descendant that uses Xorg, while all the others still uses XFree86 to respect all of the hardwork that has been contributed by debian developers.
I'm not sure what the issue with Xorg is since a lot of people with Debian use various mirrors to replace XFree or just outright install Xorg upfront on their systems running Sarge. That was my case. I just installed a base Sarge setup without any X or DE's and then used a mirror to place Xorg on the system initially along with a DM and the Xfce. I've not run into any Debian advocates that had a problem with this, and in fact many of them do the same thing.
desdinova
June 19th, 2005, 01:59 PM
Wouldn't it be better if Ubuntu return something that they take rather than expecting Debian developers taking Ubuntu source ;)
Why are you trying to start a flamewar? I've heard of no problems between Debian and Ubuntu developers - in fact, I remember reading several posts on the ML about the Mozilla Trademark issue.
Perhaps the trick is not to look for fights that don't exist?
defkewl
June 19th, 2005, 03:38 PM
In the open source world, you have to learn that your own code can be used to beat you. Ubuntu wasn't developed with the intention of stealing members of the Debian community; it just happened to convert a fair amount of people. I hope the Debian community isn't upset with Ubuntu for doing so.
They're not only upset, but pissed off :D I've read so many threads about this on debian-dev mailing list
With that said, I refuse to try Debian simply because they don't have message boards, and don't like mailing lists. :razz:
They have their own reasons not to have a message board.
desdinova
June 19th, 2005, 04:01 PM
As Ubuntu is releasing all of its changes under the GPL, it has took "nothing" from anyone. Perhaps you may need to reread the GPL and understand the idea of distro's "forking" off each other - or perhaps you may want to go to PCLinuxOnline and complain about PCLOS "stealing" off Mandriva for example ... and then go back to Mandriva "stealing" off Red Hat as Mandrake was originally a fork of Red Hat - or CentOS "stealing" off Redhat.
BTW as a heads up - putting smileys next to comments such as "p*ssed off" makes it look as if you are gloating.
TravisNewman
June 19th, 2005, 04:02 PM
Why don't we ask the Ubuntu developers who are also Debian developers?
But defkewl, from what I've read, you're concentrating on a few radical opinions instead of the overall opinion of Ubuntu.
defkewl
June 19th, 2005, 04:06 PM
But defkewl, from what I've read, you're concentrating on a few radical opinions instead of the overall opinion of Ubuntu.
I'm not supposed to throw an opinion actually :D Because that could lead into a flamewar. I'm supposed to be neutral and sending back the message I've from debian-dev mailing list. Sorry if I got carried away. Peace.
desdinova
June 19th, 2005, 04:07 PM
Perhaps ask the developers themselves - as several Ubuntu developers are also Debian developers perhaps let them speak for themselves rather then trying to provoke controversy?
Optimal Aurora
June 19th, 2005, 04:30 PM
Hay I thought that Ubuntu and Debian had something like a partnership going on... You use my code and I help you to make your system more up to date and stable...
poofyhairguy
June 19th, 2005, 11:04 PM
Wouldn't it be better if Ubuntu return something that they take rather than expecting Debian developers taking Ubuntu source ;)
Ubuntu does. Look at all these Debian patches:
http://people.ubuntu.com/~scott/patches/
Ubuntu gives back more than any other Debian spinoff. Some of the Debian people are mad because:
1. Debian has lost a lot of its Sid (or unstable) users due to Ubuntu. They want a desktop OS, and Ubuntu is good at that.
2. Debian is no longer a "glam" distro, while on the other hand Ubuntu is "hip." Jealously rears its ugly head.
3. They don't like the fact that Ubuntu is a fork of Debian. This is true, Ubuntu is a fork made off of Sid (it re-syncs parts every now and then before release) and Ubuntu has recompiled all of the Debian packages. The truth is that Debian's license allow for this, so they are basically mad they didn't read the fine print I guess.
Ubuntu forked from Debian (aka has its own repo. instead of using Debian's repo. like MEPIS and Kanotix and a lot of the other spin offs do) in order to stop breakage. From the begining Ubuntu wanted to develop faster than Debian (Xorg for example) but that would cause apt-get breakage if Ubuntu used Debian's repo. Try dist-upgrading MEPIS, you'll figure out what I'm talking about.
4. They don't like the fact that Ubuntu is not compatible with Sarge. This bugs them because they never found out that Ubuntu is forked from Sid (so it was NEVER compatible with Sarge) and because they want to build third party support for Debian. Never mind the fact that companies only like to release software for products of other companies (Red Hat as the leader).
5. They are mad that Ubuntu is making Linux easier. Some are techno elitists at heart (I am a little too I must admit).
6. Some are mad that Ubuntu hired Debian developers to create Ubuntu. Even though this gave them good jobs (aka is a good thing) it did slow down development of Sarge.
7. They are mad that now that Ubuntu exists, their stable product isn't even CONSIDERED to be used as a desktop OS even after it just releases. I know some people do use Sarge on their desktop, but since the release I have seen no reviews for Sarge on the desktop and most of its defenders admit they like it on servers best.
8. They are mad because "moneybags Mark" stole their own little rage against the corporate machine and used it as the base for his company Canonical. This ignores that fact that Linspire and Xandros also did this. I think that doesn't count because Mark is trying (and succeeding I'd say) to make Ubuntu a community OS like Debian.
Some argue "Mark should have just used all that money to improve Debian instead of making a fork." This ignores the politics and inefficient government of Debian. If Mark would have spent all of his money on Debian, internal politics would have prevented him from doing what he wanted with the money (adding xorg for example). So he said "screw it, I'll fork Debian and improve it from the outside." Its working well and some developers really like what Mark has done.
9. They are mad that Ubuntu got xorg first. I don't know why...but it pissed of some Debian developers a pretty good bit. From what I hear, they plan to institute xorg into Sid in a way that is different from Ubuntu despite the fact that Ubuntu has patches to at least give them a running start.
10. This might just be me, but Ubuntu sounds like a cooler name that Debian (especially after wikipedia told me that its "deb-Ian" and not "dee-bee-an;" one sounds like the Greek god of Linux, the other sounds like a waitress at Denny's).
I have studied this hate and fear from the Debian developers a bunch and I found that most of it is because of ignorance. In open forums where I can link to that patch page and link to the fact that Ubuntu is based off Sid then usually the tempers are defused.
I hoped that the Sarge release would make them relaxed a little and relieve the tension...so I hope ot hear nothing more of this. Both Debian and Ubuntu are great projects, and Debian should be proud that more people are using their work.
poofyhairguy
June 22nd, 2005, 05:52 AM
well. I'm glad that is settled.
TravisNewman
June 22nd, 2005, 05:55 AM
*LOL*
That was an azz style smackdown there poofy.
poofyhairguy
June 22nd, 2005, 06:00 AM
*LOL*
That was an azz style smackdown there poofy.
Thanks.
bored2k
June 22nd, 2005, 06:15 AM
Thanks.
http://www.owned.com/Owned_Pictures/shavedpussy.jpg
http://www.owned.com/Owned_Pictures/juveniledelinquent.jpg
Major ownage.
defkewl
June 22nd, 2005, 09:18 AM
There's be a talk whether Ubuntu is a fork or not at LinuxTag, Karlsruhe, Germany on Saturday, June 25th, 2005
Source: http://www.debian.org/News/2005/20050617
poofyhairguy
June 22nd, 2005, 09:24 AM
There's be a talk whether Ubuntu is a fork or not at LinuxTag, Karlsruhe, Germany on Saturday, June 25th, 2005
Source: http://www.debian.org/News/2005/20050617
Yeah. The guy giving it works for Ubuntu:
http://mako.cc/
He is a big man behind the scenes in the Ubuntu community.
redboar
July 22nd, 2005, 03:41 PM
Ubuntu gives back more than any other Debian spinoff. Some of the Debian people are mad because:
...
5. They are mad that Ubuntu is making Linux easier. Some are techno elitists at heart (I am a little too I must admit).
How nerdy.
What are us non-elitists supposed to do, run Windows Vista? ](*,)
Stormy Eyes
July 22nd, 2005, 04:10 PM
Somebody at Debian needs to man up and stop whinging.
poofyhairguy
July 22nd, 2005, 05:11 PM
How nerdy.
What are us non-elitists supposed to do, run Windows Vista? ](*,)
Nope...either suck it up or buy Linspire I guess for now.
_linux_
May 30th, 2006, 02:54 PM
Well, Debian is open source and released under the GPL, so people can do whatever they want with it! Why can't people understand this?
papangul
May 30th, 2006, 03:09 PM
Don't take all this seriously, it's just that somebody somewhere might be feeling jealous of Ubuntu's success. ;)
Zodiac
May 30th, 2006, 03:44 PM
Meaningless to me. I don't care about the technology behind the distro, or what it is derived from, so long as it works. I've never had a problem with Debian, or Ubuntu, and I'll use whichever of them suits me needs best - currently Ubuntu.
As to the politics behind the move... Debian, rightly or wrongly, has been perceived as being behind the times - a perception they're now trying to rectify, it seems.
QFT
bluenova
May 30th, 2006, 04:02 PM
Oh man, I've been involved in other open source projects and this comes up again and again and again. Anyone who has a problem with forking needs to check the various open source licences.
In fact forking software only helps to create a more stable product. As much as people hate forking, the development and code that comes from the result always ends up helping all derivatives to building better software. Sharing and changing code is even encouraged in the open source world, it's what it's all about!
asimon
May 30th, 2006, 04:18 PM
Well, Debian is open source and released under the GPL, so people can do whatever they want with it! Why can't people understand this?
Wrong, the software in Debian comes under many licenses, GPL is only one among many.
And you can be fully legal, done nothing against the law and still be immoral, unethical or evil in a multitude of ways. Being legal alone doesn't make you great in many eyes. There is more. Anyone can fork free software. No legal problem with that. But still, don't expect that the forker is perceived as great in everyones eyes. I think noeone made a claim that Ubuntu is illegal, thus I find it strange that everyone says "it's GPL, forking is okay". Was that right attacked at all?
B0rsuk
May 30th, 2006, 05:39 PM
Wrong, the software in Debian comes under many licenses, GPL is only one among many.
And you can be fully legal, done nothing against the law and still be immoral, unethical or evil in a multitude of ways. Being legal alone doesn't make you great in many eyes. There is more. Anyone can fork free software. No legal problem with that. But still, don't expect that the forker is perceived as great in everyones eyes. I think noeone made a claim that Ubuntu is illegal, thus I find it strange that everyone says "it's GPL, forking is okay". Was that right attacked at all?
In such case, I think Debian simply chose wrong license for their distribution. I suppose they'd be happier with something more restrictive, like BSD. Or even forget the open-source idea, if they're uncomfortable with it.
If you think Ubuntu is hostile to Debian, you never heard about xmule and amule. Read this: http://www.xmule.ws/phpnuke/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=2&page=5
If you think Ubuntu - Debian is relation is anything like amule - xmule... I don't know what to say.
For people who didn't get it, the first part of my post was sarcasm. Due to his nature, B0rsuk's posts often contain sarcasm.
I believe you can find malcontents everywhere. If anyone used Debian sid, it's most probably not for the server, because word has it that you can run very stable servers or even ancient Debians. So it's natural that these users left Debian once more desktop-capable debian-based distribution appeared. These users woudln't have used Debian in long run anyway. I predict that the situation will stabilize, and the remaining Debian users will be those who value it for stability, ability to run servers, etc.
See illustration1: http://www.google.pl/trends?q=debian%2C+ubuntu
I see a bit of hipocrisy here: On the one hand, Debian users often pride themselves for being nerdy and hardcore techies. The kind of users that say 'Linux should never be easy to use' etc. On the other hand, they're angry with leaving of users who just (or mostly) want to have good desktop. Incidentally, Ubuntu may be a good way to make Debian try harder with making it desktop-friendly... or make them stop trying and proclaim that Debian is for proffessional use only.
However, if you look at how Debian looks compared to other distros, it doesn't look half bad:
http://www.google.pl/trends?q=debian%2C+%22fedora+core%22%2C+suse%2C+ma ndriva%2C+gentoo&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all
(there's a technical restriction on Google Trends preventing it from displaying more than 5 items at a time)
http://www.google.pl/trends?q=debian%2C+%22fedora+core%22%2C+%22red+hat %22%2C+mandriva%2C+slackware&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all
How is Ubuntu supposed to 'give back' to Debian ? Ubuntu is GPLed, so what's the problem - the source code is freely available. Not only that, but pre-installed mozilla/konqueror bookmarks Ubuntu sets up contain http://debian.org bookmark.
Someone said Debian developers don't have.... time to browse through ubuntu-devel like stuff, bug trackers etc. In my opinion it's just another way of saying it's wrong to work on a popular Debian-based distro; Ubuntu developers should just be Debian developers instead.
Stormy Eyes
May 30th, 2006, 05:44 PM
So what do you guys think about this?
I think there are a few nancy-boys on the Debian mailing list who need to man up and stop whinging.
OffHand
May 30th, 2006, 05:54 PM
I love necro threads :mrgreen:
banjobacon
May 30th, 2006, 06:02 PM
Why do people bump nearly year-old threads for no reason at all?
Lord Illidan
May 30th, 2006, 06:11 PM
Hell..
All this about Xorg, and the like?
Why did you re-enervate this thread?
asimon
May 30th, 2006, 06:17 PM
In such case, I think Debian simply chose wrong license for their distribution.
Debian can not choose the license of the software they include at all. The respective authors do that. For example the authors of Firefox license Firefox under the Mozilla Public License. Debian has to follow this license or can choose not to include Firefox at all. They can not choose another license for Firefox.
I suppose they'd be happier with something more restrictive, like BSD. Or even forget the open-source idea, if they're uncomfortable with it.
BSD is not more restrictive then GPL.
WildTangent
May 30th, 2006, 06:33 PM
BSD is not more restrictive then GPL.
There's no obligation to release the changes back to the community if my understanding of the BSD license is correct.
-Wild
henriquemaia
May 30th, 2006, 06:37 PM
Why do people bump nearly year-old threads for no reason at all?
Because not all people join these forums at the same time. A simple search about some topic and one come accross a subject matter on which one thinks that has something to add.
Christmas
May 30th, 2006, 06:55 PM
I am not an expert, I have never used Debian only with the base system installed, neither Ubuntu. But my impression is that Ubuntu is more polished and does not crash the way Debian crashes. I used both GNOME and KDE environment in both Debian and Ubuntu/Kubuntu. In Debian applications crashed very often, in Ubuntu they were not. I did nothing to the system, after I installed the base system in Debian, I made a "apt-get install x-window-system-core kdm kde" or "gdm gnome". Then just booted into the system and it just wasn't as stable as Ubuntu. Maybe just Kubuntu is less stable than Debian with KDE, so as long as the philosphy is that free software can be modified, distributed and used by others than the authors, I don't see a problem with that.
amp_man
May 30th, 2006, 09:40 PM
Definately an interesting thread, I'm glad it was bumped. I ran debian unstable for about 6 months on my laptop before warty went beta (I've used ubuntu ever since then), and I spent much of that time updating packages, looking for repos with newer packages, and in general trying to make programs run. When ubuntu came out, it was, at least to me, "debian, up to date." True, I hated the artwork (brown seemed so drab at the time, compared to debian and fedora core 3, which I ran on my desktop), but it was stable, quick, and did what I needed it to with little messing around. Nowadays, I don't even think of messing with debian. Debian seems to me like it's built more for stability on a long-term basis, ie you install it, get your programs working, and don't bother updating except for security updates for several years, no problems whatsoever. Ubuntu, on the other hand, is more for the feature-seeking, eyecandy loving types, who don't really care if there are 15 updates a week, so long as they bring some semi-useless new feature to make their linux more "uber" (I myself being one of these types).
So, for those of you I've completely lost, both distros have their strong points. Debian is for those who favor an OS that works day in and day out (once you get it working), Ubuntu is more for those who want an OS that "just works" and looks good in the process.
As for the Windows Vista comment, I'm a die-hard linux user, but I still have a triple boot set up, Ubuntu Dapper on my 250gb hard drive, XP x64 on one 40gb drive, and Vista Beta 2 on another 40gb drive. Gotta check out what MS is doing, and besides, it looks like transgaming's gonna be a while getting oblivion to work, and I can't live without it :D
Just my 2 cents worth. And BTW, when I set up my server, it will be running Debian.
egon spengler
May 30th, 2006, 10:22 PM
Debian can not choose the license of the software they include at all. The respective authors do that. For example the authors of Firefox license Firefox under the Mozilla Public License. Debian has to follow this license or can choose not to include Firefox at all. They can not choose another license for Firefox.
BSD is not more restrictive then GPL.
Somehow I doubt that anyone involved with Debian feels aggrieved at ubuntu bundling Firefox and so I would assume though that the "outrage" over all of this is regarding Debian originated software. Surely they had control over deciding which license to use for software they wrote. In which case it would have proved prudent for them to use a license which prevented anyone else using it. It's not too late, they could still develop a new 'you can use this code as long as you don't exceed us in the public eye' license for all future projects
prizrak
May 30th, 2006, 11:46 PM
Somehow I doubt that anyone involved with Debian feels aggrieved at ubuntu bundling Firefox and so I would assume though that the "outrage" over all of this is regarding Debian originated software. Surely they had control over deciding which license to use for software they wrote. In which case it would have proved prudent for them to use a license which prevented anyone else using it. It's not too late, they could still develop a new 'you can use this code as long as you don't exceed us in the public eye' license for all future projects
Actually they used the Linux kernel, which is GPL'ed so they didn't have much of a choice. Debian really has no rights to complain they took something that was publicly available, modified it and created something they are recognized for. Ubuntu did the same exact thing. Lets face it Debian always sucked on desktops it was always way too ancient to be used for that. On the other hand Ubuntu isn't as good as Debian on servers, both distro's have different foci.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.