Markus’ Little Blog

March 14, 2011

Did you read Planet GNOME lately?

Filed under: Uncategorized — Markus S. @ 02:50

Planet GNOME is a good read lately. After Canonical found it to be a great idea to take 75% of revenue away from GNOME Foundation for an application Canonical didn’t even develop, discussions about older experiences of Canonical’s “interaction” with the GNOME community.

It basically goes on like this: Mark Shuttleworth blames GNOME for allegedly being close-minded for not adopting app indicators and GNOME people are arguing that the rejection was solely based on bad timing (feature freeze too close) and disagreement about the implementation on a purely technological level.

Whatever the truth is (read the posts and decide yourself), the aspect I find most amusing is the irony that Shuttleworth on one hand portrays himself as a victim of GNOME’s alleged high entry barrier for contributions and on the other hand requires contributors to Canonical projects (incl. the indicator library) to assign all copyrights to Canonical and rejects patches because Ubuntu is not a democracy and all design decisions are made solely by Canonical.
Either Shuttleworth is a great comedian or he really does not get the disconnection between his acts and what he preaches.

About these ads

17 Comments

  1. I stopped reading planet gnome long ago when I realized they’re writing more often about Icaza’s mono and about food rather then gnome itself. I don’t care at all about what gnome folks are writing there. They prove in last few days they cannot be taken seriously. Mark did what he should did long ago. He paid for apps, but apps in gnome are in stagnation and gnome3 is a big step backward. Gnome folks arguing the timing was bad are just funny…

    Comment by Pawlo — March 14, 2011 @ 07:15

    • Hi Pawlo,
      I’m not really sure what you mean by Mark “paying for apps”. AFAIK, Mark has only financed work on Ubuntu and work done to integrate applications with Ubuntu.
      How is Gnome 3 a step backwards? Perhaps you mean Gnome Shell, which, granted, has its backers and its opponents, but there are other shells for Gnome 3 to take advantage of: classic Gnome (which should still be available in all Gnome-based distros), the elementary desktop (which is basically an overhauled classic Gnome), Unity. Gnome 3 in itself seems to be a big step forward.

      Comment by mirek2 — March 30, 2011 @ 11:45

  2. I didn’t check the link before. How do you support gnome by paying money to mono boosters like novell? Why would Canonical want to support gnome foundation which supports ms ooxml and ms mono, so to so support novel and microsoft same time? This would be really stupid.

    Comment by Pawlo — March 14, 2011 @ 08:18

    • You seem to be a very confused person. Get help.

      Comment by Markus — March 14, 2011 @ 09:06

      • It’s funny that you’re saying this while you wrote such bull same time. Like someone said, you’re really misinformed. Get the facts.

        Comment by Pawlo — March 14, 2011 @ 12:50

      • I already got the facts.

        Comment by Markus — March 14, 2011 @ 15:41

  3. BS! It’s easy bashing the only company willing to invest most of its resource to make the best Linux desktop distribution. A media player doesn’t stand on its own.

    BTW, you seem to be seriously misinformed.

    Comment by Luiz — March 14, 2011 @ 11:01

    • It seems that’s you that’s misinformed, very misinformed! Canonical the biggest investor on Linux!??? what??? Seriously??

      And a few window decorations, a clone of Gnome-shell, bad color schemes, and lot of bragging make what? Without a kernel, graphics infrastructure, filesystems and apps, what those things would do? And those, were and are being developed at expense of Oracle, IBM, Red Hat and Novell.

      You really are a poor ignorant person!

      Comment by Awat Saha — March 14, 2011 @ 15:00

      • Read again. I didn’t say Canonical was the biggest investor.

        “invest most of its resource to make the best Linux desktop distribution”

        Canonical is betting on the losing horse(Linux Desktop), while other are putting their weight mostly on the money cow (Linux Server). Enter RHEL site, then go to ubuntu.com and you will see what I’m talking about.

        Oracle doesn’t even have a desktop version of their “Unbreakable Linux”.

        So I’ll say again, you seem to be seriously misinformed.

        Comment by Luiz — March 14, 2011 @ 15:19

      • Each Red Hat’s and Novell’s contributions to desktop Linux far outweigh Canonical’s contributions.
        Both Red Hat Enterprise Linux and SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop are targeted at corporate desktops.

        But who does how much is not the point of my blog post. You really should learn to read.

        Comment by Markus — March 14, 2011 @ 15:40

      • Putting oracle before Red Hat and IBM is a big mistake. They’re doing nearly nothing for Linux (just clones RHEL). Canonical does a lot more – it makes it popular.

        Comment by Pawlo — March 14, 2011 @ 20:17

    • I’m not bashing. I’m pointing out the huge difference in words and deeds by Shuttleworth.
      He’s demanding openness and easy contributability but doesn’t do the same.

      Comment by Markus — March 14, 2011 @ 15:36

      • Agreed. You’re post makes a really good point.

        Sorry for my useless comment, man. I really am :)
        It’s easy misinterpreting intentions, when communicating only trough writing. I’ve let emotions screen louder, it’s hard seeing all this “fighting” within the community. Sorry again…

        Comment by Luiz — March 14, 2011 @ 15:49

    • It’s not really bashing, it’s just juxtaposing Gnome’s behavior, so passionately criticized by Mark Shuttleworth, to Canonical’s own behavior, which is just as bad, if not worse (from my own experience, I find Gnome more cooperative).

      As for the Banshee problem, Canonical took 75% away from the Gnome Foundation — now the money will be donated to Canonical. Given that Ubuntu is based on technology made and managed by the Gnome Foundation (Gnome, GTK+, and various Gnome applications) and not vice versa, this seems like a very unfriendly move. The money will be spent on improving solely Ubuntu instead of going toward GTK+ development (which is not only the base for GNOME and its appliacations, but also for XFCE and LXDE), Gnome development, or development of apps under the Gnome Foundation umbrella.

      Comment by mirek2 — March 30, 2011 @ 12:20

  4. I can understand that this patch was rejected.
    First of all it depends on Qt, then it adds a lot of settings.
    If you’d try to commit such a patch to plasma to configure the notifications I am sure it would be rejected by the plasma maintainers.

    Also you might have forgotten but KDE is not a democrazy either. You have maintainers who decide in the end. As Aaron put it once — I forgot the exact term he used — those who do a lot decide also a lot.

    Comment by mat69 — March 14, 2011 @ 18:36

  5. @Luiz

    “Read again. I didn’t say Canonical was the biggest investor.”

    Neither did I!

    I just said the others, and the names that i wrote were just a sample, invest much more on improving things for desktop users. Only those contributions are not as visible. Red Hat work on the graphics subsystem alone is fundamental! Without it Canonical couldn’t make anything they are doing now.

    “Canonical is betting on the losing horse(Linux Desktop), while other are putting their weight mostly on the money cow (Linux Server). Enter RHEL site, then go to ubuntu.com and you will see what I’m talking about.”

    Like I said Red Hat contributions to the DESKTOP are more important in size and in time; they are doing it for far longer!

    “Oracle doesn’t even have a desktop version of their “Unbreakable Linux”.”

    Clearly you can’t see the big picture! Oracle have made contributions that will flow back to desktop users, fundamental contributions, like btrfs. Even mobile users, phones and tablets, will use them. Not to mention all the work made by Sun before it was acquired, their contributions to gnome and accessibility are more important than those of Canonical!

    “So I’ll say again, you seem to be seriously misinformed.”

    Yes, and again, you show yourself be a completely ignorant person, worse you’re proud of that! It’s just sad!

    @all others

    It’s just a pity that people can’t argue without their prejudices showing. Your personal opinion of Oracle should not stop you from seeing the facts. Their contributions to Linux are significant! Their work on btrfs alone is more important and influential than any of Canonical’s work.

    Comment by Awat Saha — March 15, 2011 @ 14:56

  6. @Markus

    “Each Red Hat’s and Novell’s contributions to desktop Linux far outweigh Canonical’s contributions.
    Both Red Hat Enterprise Linux and SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop are targeted at corporate desktops.

    But who does how much is not the point of my blog post. You really should learn to read.”

    I’m uncertain if this comment is directed at me. But if it’s…

    I was not commenting on your article, i was replying to Luiz, and in that context i stand by my comments!

    Comment by Awat Saha — March 15, 2011 @ 15:00


RSS feed for comments on this post.

The Rubric Theme Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: