Canonical Contributing Too Little to Kernel Development?
This week the Linux Foundation published statistics of the people and companies behind the kernel development. Canonical is not mentioned at all.
"Canonical, where are you?" asks Sam Varghese of iTWire.com. Red Hat, IBM, Novell and Intel are all mentioned in the Linux Foundation Study, but not one word about the Linux distribution of the very popular Ubuntu can be found, he writes.
Similar criticism has already been voiced by Novell's kernel developer Greg Kroah-Hartman. Back in September of last year, he used his keynote at the Linux Plumbers Conference to attack Canonical over its level of contribution in kernel development.
Criticism on the criticism has again been quick in coming – one comment to the Varghese news points out that Linux does not only consist of the kernel, and Canonical has done some very positive marketing work for Linux.
great post
http://www.cocoschanel.com
http://www.gucciguccis.com
http://www.urboots.com
http://www.handbags2012.com
http://www.louisvuittonslv.com
http://www.uggmalls.com
Really... who cares?
Debian?
Except Debian is not a company. Canonical is.
To Ubuntu
Ubuntu
Get your patches upstream boys & girls.
Re: Ubuntu contributions?
Regarding this:
It should also be noted until recently Conical didn't directly contribute to Debian either though they just announced they would be providing 10 or so developers which is both good and appropriate.
That's incorrect. Canonical already employs a number of debian developers (actually some debian users criticize Canonical for having "poached" devs) and has done so since the start.
To whom much is given
Must be Xandros
Bill, the onus is on you to show why you are under the impression that Canonical is taking more than it is putting in, Carling, I have heard this kind of argument about how much better other distributions are until you try them, yes they may be better at something but that is not the point. Ubuntu offers the best choice for most users it has become popular for a good reason, please appreciate what Shuttleworth is doing and has done for Linux and stop the nonsense, the kernel, while being the heart of the operating system is not all there is, why not encourage some people frustrated by the rubbish on windows to start using the Linux kernel? even Gnome and KDE and other desktops alone are not sufficient to have a good experience, everything from drivers to development tools to productivity applications and management tools combine to make a modern operating system comparable to the proprietary systems, this must be done for Linux get a good grip in the marketplace, hence accelerating its further development and acceptance, even increasing its usefulness to advanced users, Canonical has done a good job in spearheading this drive already.
Ubuntu
I'm not exactly sure how you can say Canonical is a lucrative business. So far Shuttleworth has done nothing but pour money into it. He doesn't have unlimited funds so their development has to go to what they deem is most important. Once they have the manpower, revenue and profits of Red Hat (which is on the small end of most of the top contributors yet dwarfs Canonical) then let's judge them by their contributions. As it is they are only now getting close to generating a profit. Like it or not he didn't start Canonical to funnel his hard earned money into Linux but to build a profitable and sustainable company and that's exactly what he's building. You don't do that by throwing money away but carefully picking and choosing where your resources are spent.
Why are kernel enhancements the only thing considered?
Ubuntu makes a great desktop distro for regular PC users - which is what I consider myself to be. I need a distro that is easy to use, maintain and upgrade. Ubuntu has worked for me flawlessly when others failed. That is a huge contribution to regular users like me.
Ubuntu helps out the Linux ecosystem by being a great marketeer. This gets Linux into the hands of more people which ends up generating greater interest and support. This has to be good for all projects - including the kernel.
Why bash them for not doing something? Why not praise them for doing what they are doing extremely well?
It would be great if Canonical make kernel patches for improving the desktop experience but perhaps limited resources prevents that. Also would the kernel developers accept kernel patches that improved the desktop user experience? There was a letter from a kernel developer that quit in protest because he couldn't get his kernel patches that improved desktop user experiences approved and added to the kernel.
They may not be producing kernel patches, but they are contributing to the overall end-user experience. And for that, I am appreciative.
linux kernel developers contributing too little
Unbuntu
Every time I bought a Linux Magazine it's all about Ubuntu, Suse or Fedora all the commercial supported distributions, there are better distributions out that leave these in the shade, Linux Mint and Sabayon are great distros, Over the weekend I downloaded Pardus Linux that blows all the commercials distributions away when it come to Speed, it's lightening fast, Yes Linux Magazine you are one that's always promoting the commercial Linux camps, that's the reason I have stopped buying your magazine I got to many Ubuntu. Suse, and Fedora DVD's over the last 12 months
Ubuntu contributions?
It should also be noted until recently Conical didn't directly contribute to Debian either though they just announced they would be providing 10 or so developers which is both good and appropriate.
If someone would list Conical contributions to other projects I for one would be appreciative. Fyi I'm one of those who is under the impression that Ubuntu takes more then it give and would be happy to be proven wrong.