Linked by Kroc Camen on Sun 13th Sep 2009 16:33 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu "For the last 12 months, I have used Ubuntu 8.04, 8.10, and 9.04 as my primary OSes. I remain a very happy Linux convert, but I worry that Ubuntu is being unevenly developed. Certain areas have seen great improvements over the last 12 months, while other areas have languished or been largely ignored. The purpose of this article is not to whine or rant, but to bring some perspective to the evolution (or lack thereof) that Ubuntu has experienced between versions 8.04 and 9.04."
Permalink for comment 384107
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Managing the Future
by dulac on Tue 15th Sep 2009 10:49 UTC
Member since:

On the last years, we have seen the infamous Microsoft learning a lot from Linux. However it seems that GNU-Linux seems to have more dificuties to do the same.

I talking about reformulating strategies. Excelent code is usualy a stimulus to keep going. But like sabatic years are a way to get the feet on the groud and re-evaluate ones perspective, the need to do so is a dificult one when so many people is involved.

Ubuntu really maked a diference, but it riscs to be lost soon if re-evaluation is not taken in consideration, And Ubuntu is in the best position to lead the way.

Why is that needed when everything seems to go just fine? Well… that’s when people become satisfied enough to let itself to dive in problems. When none is expected. A pleasant is a warning signal, paradoxical as it may seem.

What may be the problem? We all know it really: Increased Complexity that will, sooner or later, limit options of development. Not so? We do see that coming in the excessive dependencies build up. Clean structure are, little by little, being lost in favour of of expansion of code.
And the time a distro build up takes... or the related chance that a change may crach something is also a warning signal. Much time was lost already, by the effort of building up features. Where reformulation and simplification, like a sabatic year, would be a needed step.

Let's remind that a rational common structure instead of patching features allows saving time and avoid problems. I supose that is the reason behind the future GTK and the new KDE, but also XFCE, Enligtment and LXDE.
But let's remind that unless united by a common messaging system, all these are dispersing trends where they could be sinergetic efforts.

This is not advocating a stop. Just a reminder for consideration. As stated, the next GTK seems to be have recognised a problem. And there is one building up everywere, We just need to be conscious of it and not fall in a winning Microsoft like perspective. We remember where that lead the infamous Microsoft. Heaviness!

What can be done?:
The basic aproach is, as always the KISS rule. One task is the modularization of systems and the standardization of it’s connections. What does this mean?
Simply that libraries should be interchanged accordingly with the target computers, or it’s users.
In other words, factoring the elements in play, the basic philosophy of small tools interconected must be revived in libraries usage.

And if someone used this our that environment, this should not mean a dependency of huge library tools. They should be designed, and built, to be shared and of easy replacement. The goal being have lesser code and keep the traditional efficiency of GNU-Linux.

Adaptability not achieved by having lots of (growing) specialised code to choose but by clean designs allowing code to be small. (Like the Enligthment environment? Not sure. It seems so).
When things get too big, it is time to look back and understand how that was allowed to happen. It is not to stop the present, go back to the past, but to prepare the future.

Unifying is not mixing everything to be able to do eveything… is getting the commons well oiled so the particular blocks may have a good foundation to work. Be it a limited block for a small machine or a more expended one for a big machine. The rationale is a common and efficient foundation for what will be used above.

That involves sharing essencials, not particulars. We already see that problem in the dependies tree.
It’s spring cleanning time.

Reply Score: 1