As a followup on the earlier news reports on Ian’s comments that Ubuntu “is a net negative for Debian”, more friction between Debian and Ubuntu developers have burst out over Ubuntu package maintainers modifying Debian packages without changing the contact information results in inconsistent bug reports in the Debian bug tracker.
Ubuntu and its “appropriation” of Debian maintainers
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
We found something else to talk about.
In other news, people are human and make mistakes…
To me, it sounds like the Debian guys are a bit wroked up… They need to chill a bit. Ubuntu is helping Debian in many ways as well
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/05/msg00037.html
Changing the maintainer field:
– “foo is taking credit for my work!”
– Requires modification of every source package, even if it is otherwise identical
Not changing the maintainer field:
– “foo is blaming me for someone else’s bugs!”
– Users sometimes contact the wrong party (though reportbug does the right thing)
i’ve been a long-time sid user but now i switched to ubuntu because debian wasn’t getting anywhere (sure, there were a lot of stable packages and lots of supported architechtures). that wasn’t what i wanted..i wanted fresh ppc packages and therefore i switched.. now debian should have released sarge long time ago because nothing’s ever gonna be perfect, so people could actually get sid up to speed again.. don’t wonder if people start jumping onto the faster train – although i agree that if they’re changing the packages they should update the maintainers address because otherwise debian’ll get delayed even more – i’d like to see both distributions walking hand in hand with ubuntu specializing on user friendlyness/gnome (kde for kubuntu) and debian doing the core-stability work -> everybody what they’re doing best – which results in the best for users! i know we don’t live on planet utopia but that doesn’t mean we have to fight and envy each other!
I think the big source of friction is that Ubuntu is squeezing Debian out of the desktop space. I mean, there was no free Debian-based distribution before Ubuntu. People who like .deb packages and apt-get just ran off Debian unstable. Now with Ubuntu, there is a stable OS that is up to date while Debian Sarge still isn’t out.
At first, Ubuntu looked like a way to feed more development into Debian, but now it looks more like it is syphoning development away from Debian. More and more people see Sarge as something that will never come. Frankly, the earliest I can see it coming is this fall and by then, the Gnome implementation will be 2 versions old.
Ian said that Ubuntu “is a net negative for Debian”. But does that matter? This is free software. We really shouldn’t be worrying about what is best for a certain project, but what is best for the community at large. Ubuntu has been amaing for the community at large. Debian missed the boat by not having released anything officially stable in nearly 3 years. I kinda feel like someone needed to step up and actually produce. And since Ubuntu produced, everyone is flocking from Debian to it and it has left Debian in the lurch. When Sarge comes out, it will be a great update for servers running woody, but it will be out of date for my personal desktop. And the work seems monumental to catch up to Ubuntu.
It’s just kinda saddening. It feels like a favorite teddy bear is being passed over for the one that is softer, prettier, and can talk and hug back. I hate to ask (partially because of the flame-war that might follow; partly because I don’t really want an answer), but is Debian becoming obsolete? More importantly, what could Debian do to become a better player?
isn’t knoppix debian based?
It is, but wasn’t meant to be a desktop distro.
Debian itself is Debian made wrong. People are moving to Ubuntu for a _reason_. They’re tired of waiting for release. And even when release gets out, it’s packaged with already obsolate software.
Time based release schedule with long enough (1,5 years) support period simply is enough. (For those who need longer, Redhat offers 5 years with +2 extended, as does Novell for it’s enterprise distributions (Novell Desktop, SUSE Enterprise server).
But for desktop, In my opinion there couldn’t be better release policy than every 6 months with 18 months support.
Geez, I just can’t believe it!!! Debian is mad at Ubuntu because a) They forked b) They are gaining momentum at at very fast pace c) They made a mistake.
That is the fscking consequence of the GPL license (or any other FOSS license, for that matter). Debian has to stop moaning about Ubuntu doing things better than Debian does (yes, it all boils down to this).
Having had a cursory look at the list, I get the impression that there are of course some things debian devs didn’t like, but to call it a friction and make a news story of it really reeks of sensationalism.
Really, nothing bad has happened, there have been some misunderstandings and the guys are discussing them. Fine, that’s the way it should be.
i was a long time debian user too, until i discovered warty.
ubuntu is *now* exactly what users expected from debian if the debian devs weren’t so conservative. have you ever tried to question debian release cycle? or why woody is still the latest stable release after so many years? or just ask something on their ML, NG, IRC chan’s…?
the only answer you’d get would be: “already discussed”
i think the whole ubuntu thing can only be a good opportunity for debian to “rethink” its release policy: we are already seeing some benefits with the recent discussion about supporting just a few arch’s in the next debian stable release.
why can’t debian catch up with the users’ requests? WE – i still love debian, that’s why i use ubuntu 😉 – just kept asking for something like this for years:
* smaller “supported packages” selection, ok for servers and the such, and wider “unsupported packages” for everything else
* the death of the triple-release cycle!
* predictable releases (every 6, 9, 12 months… you decide)
* recent software
ubuntu is just a desktop-oriented, bleeding edge debian with the above requests fullfilled and debian devs have to decide whether to follow the example or start blaming ubuntu for non-issues…
*** i’d switch back to debian anytime, good luck ***
This is just like when the KDE project flew off the handle with Redhat.
If you don’t want someone doing something with your code, put it in the license. Reading Debian Weekly News there is one license after another being questioned as to Freeness. If you want it to be Free, then great, but remember what that means.
Debian needs to add a license clause to all their distributed packages that if you modify this package and redistribute, the original contact must be removed. End of problem.
Ubuntu didn’t make a mistake, they are well within their rights.
Planet Debian has decided to drop Ian Murdock, for the offense of “advertising Progeny”, despite the many postings
I’ve seen there that plug Ubuntu.
See http://kitenet.net/~joey/blog/entry/debian_founder_not_allowed_on_p… for details.
Don’t get me wrong, I like Ubuntu I have it on 2 of my systems. I also have an old Debian box, AMD K6-2 with 128 megs of ram that runs just as well. However Ubuntu is not without it’s flaws. I’ve been having some major issues with both my Ubuntu boxes. Issues I never had with my Debian box. Don’t be so quick to put Debian in it’s grave. What does Ubuntu offer that Debian doesn’t? Gnome 2.10 thats nothing really special. All that really changed from a “users” stand point is they added a new menu for Places and added some eye candy. I here Kubuntu isn’t all that hot however, I haven’t tried it myself. Although I am a Gnome Fan, My debian box runs fine with many DE’s
this is off topic but I also feel the same way about Libranet what do they offer besides a GUI admin tool.
I’m happy and comfortable at a CLI all day. I ask is the Admis tool woth 80 us dollars?
seems as if most of you posting comments didn’t even read what the article was pointing to..
To me, it sounds like the Debian guys are a bit wroked up…
i’ve been a long-time sid user but now i switched to ubuntu because debian wasn’t getting anywhere
People are moving to Ubuntu for a _reason_.
Debian is mad at Ubuntu because …
i was a long time debian user too, until i discovered warty.
Don’t get me wrong, I like Ubuntu I have it on 2 of my systems.
read the email…
On the other hand, I’ve had packages for which ubuntu has moved to a newer upstream version without properly updating the debian/ files, resulting in packages that are severely broken (some to the point of unusability), with my name listed as maintainer.
stay on topic.. stay on topic…
Your right I apologize. I was responding to the other posters putting down Debian to boost Ubuntu
Ubuntu is more popular, I believe, simply because it is easier to use than Debian while still keeping the wide range of packages available for Debian, the stability of Debian, and so on. Further, Ubuntu is more reliable than Debian in terms of release cycles (Ubuntu releases a new version every 6 months).
Debian developers, if you don’t like that your distribution is losing ground to Ubuntu, you should think about what has made Ubuntu so successful and where you have gone wrong. Whining that Ubuntu is stealing your thunder is not helpful to anyone.
I have heard of people who use Ubuntu who try to get help on the IRC Debian channels and fail because the helpers don’t know Ubuntu. These are all results of a single action- Ubuntu forking away from Debian- and it will take a little time to sort things out. I believe that Ubuntu will change the contact info, and just give credit to Debian instead of its individual developers (for better or worse). In a few years, this will mostly be settled, much like people don’t have problems with the differences between Mandriva and Fedora today…
Isn’t one of the defining features of Debian that it runs on many architectures? That is one of the largest reasons that the installer ‘sucks’ and the releases are slow – making a x86 hardware autodetection and GUI is likely considerably easier than making an installer that works with *eleven* different architectures. In any case, it is a fairly trivial matter to get Debian installed and running cutting edge packages. Debian, however, is not, and was never intended to be, about cutting edge packages.
I have no problem with both Debian and Ubuntu existing. If someone asks what should they run on their x86 desktop; I have no problem suggesting Ubuntu *or* Debian. Ubuntu is quick and pretty; Debian proper lets you learn a bit more and may be more stable. However, if they want to know what linux to play with on their os/390 I likely won’t suggest Knoppix or Ubuntu for obvious reasons. Stability, familiarity, a standard between architectures are all good for many things; and will go a lot farther than a pretty installer and good sound card detection if you have no interest in either.
I wish I could remember the source of the quote that went something like, “Any debian but debian.” Militantly free also fits into the equation, but that goes far beyond anything I am willing to argue about as I just don’t know enough about the issues involved. If people would step back a bit and get past the issues, it is obvious to me that there are obvious benefits to be had for both Ubuntu and Debian, as they both have large followings and really compliment each other. Just my two cents.
Sometimes OSNews just sucks. Why this trollish article? There is no flameware or so going on AFAICS, someone just pointed out some problems, and they are sorting them out right now (just read the entire thread). Why has everything to be played up so much? Remembers me of the “New default theme for Gnome”-thingy…
Instead of complaining about bug tracker being bad employed, Debian people should stop living in their own world and start to listen to users…
They should :
-RELEASE !
-Improve debconf, which many people think it is a bad tool
-Stop fixing things and organizing things in a Debian-specific way
-Make a better installer
-Make their site more “appealing” and more “interactive”
Here’s an interesting comparision of package versions in Ubuntu hoary and Debian testing at the time of hoary’s release.
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2005/04/14#2005-04-14-sarge-v-h…
This comparison shows that Ubuntu has modified quite a lot of Debian packages (and, of course, added lots of packages of its own). But the downside of such activity on the Ubuntu camp is that apparently Ubuntu doesn’t have the resources to handle the maintenance problems that it brings, and it’s no use to cry for Debian developers’ help to fix the blunders that Ubuntu devs have made in modifying Debian packages.
In time this could become a real problem for Ubuntu — especially if they are branching off from Debian, as it would appear. Ubuntu has got a ready-made high-quality system with the new installer and everything from Debian. But if Ubuntu decides to go its own way, they need to spend more time and resources into developing and maintaining the whole system, instead of concentrating on all the fun and cool stuff like new desktop tweaks, and this means that they would have to radically cut down the amount of distributed packages. And this, in turn, would mean that Ubuntu’s popularity would rapidly start to wane.
If Ubuntu decides to step down from the shoulders of the giant called Debian, then we’ll see how big Ubuntu really is.
I really don’t get it – what is the big attraction about Ubuntu?
I first tried Linux (various lightweight distros – Vector / Peanut / Libranet / Debian) two years ago, but not wanting to pay any money for something I wasn’t really sure I wanted, I gave up. Recently with cool free stuff like ntfsresize, I had the confidence to double boot on my Windows XP laptop, so I installed Debian testing, as Debian was the best of the distros that I tried.
It works fine, I can find the software that I want… so what exactly does Ubuntu give me? I don’t care about release cycles. For windows I can see that it makes sense, but with Debian my software is constantly apt-get update && apt-get upgradable.
But, that’s just me 🙂
> so what exactly does Ubuntu give me?
Must have something to do with desktop integration and Gnome.
I use IceWM on Sarge, so my best guess is that Ubuntu doesn’t really offer *me* anything substantial. However, for someone running Gnome on Sarge, maybe Ubuntu does a better job at that — dunno.
Personally though, even if I ran Gnome I’d still stay with Debian — I like their strong commitment to free software, their social contract and DFSG, their recognition of GNU, etc. I’m also interested to see how things turn out in the coming year with Branden at the helm. My bet is that good things are afoot.
“Ubuntu is more popular, I believe, simply because it is easier to use than Debian while still keeping the wide range of packages available for Debian, the stability of Debian, and so on.”
Unfortunately, you believe wrong. Ubuntu is not easier to use than Debian, it is almost exactly the same. It does not have the range of packages available for Debian, it does not have the stability of Debian.
“Isn’t one of the defining features of Debian that it runs on many architectures? That is one of the largest reasons that the installer ‘sucks’ ”
The current Debian installer is almost EXACTLY the same as Ubuntu. There may be 1 or 2 extra questions, but seriously, it’s exactly the same.
“If Ubuntu decides to step down from the shoulders of the giant called Debian, then we’ll see how big Ubuntu really is.”
I’ll give that an amen. Rather, we’ll see how small Ubuntu really is.
“Must have something to do with desktop integration and Gnome.”
Maybe you can explain this a little better. Ubuntu’s Gnome is really nothing more than the latest Gnome, and an ugly brown theme. Ubuntu Gnome acts exactly like Gnome in Debian (best I can tell, if there is any difference it’s so marginal I certainly can’t see it.. btw, since Gnome IS the destop, how can it have better “desktop integration”?).
Debian is the real thing. Ubuntu is the flavor of the week.
“Ian said that Ubuntu “is a net negative for Debian”. But does that matter? This is free software. We really shouldn’t be worrying about what is best for a certain project, but what is best for the community at large. Ubuntu has been amaing for the community at large.”
I totally agree. if ubuntu hadn’t come along – i would still be using windows.
ubuntu had the right hardware support, looks, name, logo, and friendliness that i expect in my main os. Also it has a great community forum, which makes it much easier for users like myself to switch over.
All I have to say is talk the talk, walk the walk. Unbuntu is Walking, Debian is still in turmoil over who is in power and when to release something. If you want to get anywhere you haveto get off your butt and do it and stop debating about it.
Enough Said!
Dude, you should stop trolling…
“Unfortunately, you believe wrong. Ubuntu is not easier to use than Debian, it is almost exactly the same. It does not have the range of packages available for Debian, it does not have the stability of Debian.”
Maybe you are right about the range of packages and stability, but you know what? For most use cases, the difference it’s negligible. But about ease of use, most packages on ubuntu have small tweaks, to make a smoother user experience. Those little things makes difference. You can take my word as a old debian unstable user who used to spent a *lot* of time doing small fixes by hand.
So, saying that in ease of use they are almost the same is stretching things a little bit, and I know what I’m talking about.
“I’ll give that an amen. Rather, we’ll see how small Ubuntu really is.”
Wow, I suppose that we should be impressed with this assertion. Come on, comparing debian, that has almost 1000 developers with ubuntu, that have maybe 30 core developers + MOTUs, it’s pretty unfair. Compared to debian, ANY linux distro can be considered tiny.
That said, it’s pretty obvious that ubuntu cannot survive without debian, and ubuntu is trying to make good relations with debian. Ubuntu’s infrastructure is yet incomplete, and some time will be required for sorting out this issues.
“Maybe you can explain this a little better. Ubuntu’s Gnome is really nothing more than the latest Gnome, and an ugly brown theme. Ubuntu Gnome acts exactly like Gnome in Debian (best I can tell, if there is any difference it’s so marginal I certainly can’t see it.. btw, since Gnome IS the destop, how can it have better “desktop integration”?).”
You know, ubuntu packages for 2.10 are the basis for debian ones that are entering debian experimental at the time of this writing
About integration: It’s about a careful selection of software that is known to talk with each other and small tweaks for ensuring that those apps will work with sensible defaults. The comment about brown is just trollish, I suppose.
“Debian is the real thing. Ubuntu is the flavor of the week.”
People doesn’t seem to get it. They are supposed to cooperate and make each other better, for you, and me, and everybody that uses a free software OS.
Sure, some Debian Developers are pissed of by a number of things, specially people praising Ubuntu (while bashing Debian). But I’m sure that those rough edges will be sorted out soon and people can enjoy both ubuntu and debian.
I know that you will be upset, but ubuntu will be a good and tasty flavor of the “Real Thing” that will be among us for a long time
“I here Kubuntu isn’t all that hot however”
It has some small issues that can be worked around, but it’s generally a very solid environment. I’ve tried a load of distributions in the past (albeit on older hardware with some autodetection issues) – Red Hat 9, Mepis, Mandrake – and I’ve seen other distros in action on other hardware – SuSE, Slackware, Fedora Core, other Debian derivatives – but Kubuntu is one of the best I’ve seen and is now my distro of choice.
Hi…
I know almost nothing about linux… this is why my view probably reflects (at least partially) the view of a M$ user that tryes to switch to Linux.
I tested a few different NUX like Fedora, debian, mandrake and recently Ubuntu.
What was important for me was to have:
– My applications to work (DNS server / Open Office / TV Time (Yes I know… I watch TV when I’m on my PC))
– A reactive PC
– Easy installation of Hardware and Software.
What will follow is NOT an expert opinion but what I saw (out of the box) is that:
– Fedora has a very nice installer and very good hardware recognition, but complementar software installation isn’t very smooth (even with APT/synatic)
– Debian has a very good complementar software installation procedure. APT works perfectly, but I had terrible problems with my network + kernel 2.6.x.
– I didn’t like mandrake because (in my opinion) it’s to much oriented toward France… I’m french speaking but I’m not French!!! (PS: Sorry for my english 😉
– Ubuntu gave me at the same time a good hardware recognition AND a well working software installation procedure… And over all… Ubuntu is the realase where my PC is the most reactive (And not only a bit)
FOR ME Ubuntu is the best release and I’ll stuck on it a while (Until I find better or until my knowledge of linux groves enough to see that maybe another release is better)
Just one last thing… PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE… This is NOT a troll posting… I just showed the things how I (and only I) saw it.
Good continuation
Novad
I read some of the comments at the debian list, and eugenia is making up a dispute where there is a constructive discussion about how to solve a tricky situation.
Nowhere did I get the impression that the debian packagers were angered at the ubuntu people for taking debian as a base.
It’s not because Ubuntu would be so much better, just because of the attitude. In Debian, which is still mainly developer guided distro, there’s still some RTFM attitude. While Ubuntu works a lot to make a dialogue with their users.
Debian could be where Ubuntu is some while ago. If only it had better marketing plan and marketing team. They need one and if they had one, they could really sweep some things around the world as we know it.
I am currently running Kubuntu on my latop, but I am so sick and tired of the ubuntu fanboys that thinks that their mom’s basement desktop and their needs are what make for a great distribution.
You know what Debian offers and why it takes time? It offers quality assurance such as when you will upgrade grom Woody to Sarge on a bunch of different architectures, nothing will break.
And not everyone runs X86. I love Debian and I love the fact that it doesn’t release every six, nine, twelve or eighteen months. A change of operating systems every three years is as much as the market is willing to bear.
Other than a few weeks, most enterprises and home users want something that does NOT change and when it does change, they want the upgrade to be painless. This is what Debian offers. This discussion will be over as soon as Sarge is out -which will be within 6-9 weeks, as Sarge offers a very recent KDE/Gnome with great technology underneath it.
If you think that everyone wants to be on a constant upgrade trademill, you are dead wrong. In fact, this was and remains one of Linux’s strong points. Eventually, what I hope to see is Ubuntu completely merging with Debian so that one is only a branded branch of the other, but they are both completely interoperable and compatible.
This is what Progeny Linux is doing today and I commend them for it.
Get a grip and stop this silly and endless evangelizing of Ubuntu. You are getting fucking annoying, even for those of us that like what Ubuntu has brought to the scene in technical terms.
The distribution is great, Ubuntu’s site is great, the engineers and Shuttleworth are great. All of the fanboys are fucking annoying.
I do not think that the difference is just marketing. Ubuntu is really more polished out of the box. This is a big plus even to the “power user” (I guess that’s what I am :-).
I still have Debian testing/unstable on my desktop (now I rarely use it), but I installed Ubuntu on my laptop. It installed cleanly, and that really surprised me. I tried Sarge just a week earlier, and while it got most of the things right, some peripherials were not configured properly. I needed to hand edit config files quite a lot, patch and recompile the kernel, e.t.c.
With Ubuntu touchpad, USB mouse is properly working, and the thing actually hibernates. Out of the box, right after install. My only complaint was that there was no easy way to include multiverse/universe in the apt sources, but otherwise my laptop was ready for use when the installer finished.
It’s not that I am a newbie or something, I’ve been using Linux almost exclusively for the last 6 years for home/work and also homework :-), but I find it really comfortable if the patching/testing/config tweaking is done by somebody else, in this case the Ubuntu team :-).
Just get Sarge done and out the door. Put Woody in maintenance mode and get the porting teams up to Sarge. They also need to increase the size of there security teams because Debian needs to support Woody and Sarge. Ubuntu can be around for people that want the latest and greatest. Sarge can be around for people who want a super free distro, stability, and portability.
All of this should be a no-brainer.
I do not think that the difference is just marketing. Ubuntu is really more polished out of the box. This is a big plus even to the “power user” (I guess that’s what I am :-).
I still have Debian testing/unstable on my desktop (now I rarely use it), but I installed Ubuntu on my laptop. It installed cleanly, and that really surprised me.
Ok. First, if you’re a power user, then why do you put so much weight on the installer’s slickness. Second, if all you use Ubuntu for is the good installer, then please tell me you ever tried Progeny or Libranet, they are also quite great.
Other than that, Ubuntu is just a nice way of installing a debian base. I never could see much more in it, although I tried all versions up to now. About Debian compatibility, they seem to want to get a bit more distant, and I don’t like that (package format changes misery lately for example).
A frequent argument I hear in favor of Ubuntu is the more frequent releases, since so many people are just tired of wainting for Debian to release. I call BS on that. I use Debian SID for more than 3 years now as my constant desktop linux version of choice (besides frequently testing other distros), and never felt the need to change it. I won’t go into details on why, I’m tired of fighting closed ear Ubuntu people. But the main reason is: I didn’t need to reinstall the damn thing in 3 years (just keep copying over and updating regularly), and still have the latest stable software releases, because yes, SID is quite stable for desktop use.
I have Debian on my main machine, on my work machine, on my laptop, on 2 servers I maintain at work, all releases (sid, sarge, woody, even 1 potato). Up to now Ubuntu could not provide me a good reason to switch on neither of these machines. And before you bash me, yes I have Ubuntu installed even now under vmware. I have all releases of it, live and install, as of other ~ two dozen distros.
Ok. First, if you’re a power user, then why do you put so much weight on the installer’s slickness. Second, if all you use Ubuntu for is the good installer, then please tell me you ever tried Progeny or Libranet, they are also quite great.
I told you why I care for slick install: it saves me work if I have to reinstall 🙂 I did not try Progeny or Libranet, I am lazy, and I also move slowly. During all the years of my linux usuage, I only used Slack (in the beginnig), Debian, RH, Debian again, and now Ubuntu.
Also, please note that I did not say Ubuntu is the BEST or something. I only said, that in my opinion it is more polished, because it works on my laptop out of the box, and has some more recent software that I care about than Sarge. As the subject indicates, I was replying to a post that said “Ubuntu simly has better marketing”. That is what I argue.
I do not care about frequent releases that much, since I could get more or less up-to-date using Debian with adding extra repositiories for e.g. kde3.4. But using other repo-s than the main debian site did cause problems for me: for e.g. more than one package claiming ownership of a given file and stuff. I do not say that is a disaster or something most of the time I could correct the situation in less than 30 minutes, but still I prefer not having to do stuff like that. Did I say I was lasy? 🙂 I do not enjoy doing “infrastructure” work on my machines. I enjoy using them.
Time to put your belief in your own license to the test Debian folks.
…that some “I-Just-Want-All-That-Bleeding-Edge-Packages” people are somewhat neglecting importance of stability of server operating system…
If you think debian is just some sitting duck ready to rot stinky to heaven, then you are wrong…or you never heard of something great called “security.debian.org” 🙁
If you want some bleeding edge “heavily desktop oriented” distro without leaving apt and dpkg world, go to ubunto or just apt-get dist-upgrade to Sid, and stop trashing debian or undermining all the effort debian devs are now doing.
Debian earned its credit by stability, not by some bleeding edge package thingies…
You don’t just stop or risk stability of your preciousssss server everyday to just upgrade your libgtk+ or something like that.
Debian has been an invaluable free software project, perhaps the best there’s ever been. I think we can all agree that Debian (and its repositories) are great for the health and free software.
When progress was slow and steady in the 90’s, debian was the gold standard of Linux distributions. Things have changed, and the pace of free software development across the board has picked up significantly. This does not make Debian obsolete, and this does not mean that the Debian project needs to learn from the new kids on the block. As many posters mention, countless distributions owe their very existence to Debian.
The good thing about Debian is that you can use it (straight up) to build a stable, reliable platform. But the GREAT thing about Debian is that other projects can leverage its massive body of work to create platforms that are more ambitious in other ways. This is a net positive (to borrow Ian’s language) for the free software community.
The net negative for Debian is that Ubuntu users are sending bug reports upstream to Debian devs even if the bug is Ubuntu-specific. As an active member of Gentoo community, I can attest that this is not a unique situation. For free software to work, credit must be given where credit is due, and the same goes for bug reports.
In the days of relative obscurity, it was OK to make bold statements to the effect of “this software is offered as is, with no guarantee that it won’t destroy your machine and everything on it.” Today, free software carries a little more responsibility as it moves gradually into the mainstream, and this process must be accompanied by some careful considerations.
I hope the team drafting version 3 of the GPL realizes this. There should be specific requirements for logging the various parties that have contributed to a package. Packages must explicitly list (at least) the original and current maintainers of the source package, the maintainers of distributed package, and the maintainers of any distributed packages on which the current package is based. In the case of Ubuntu, the package would list the person(s) responsible for bugs in the software as well as for bugs in the packaging. Also, credit is given to previous code maintainers and package maintainers.
If such requirements were built into the license, these types of complaints would be effectively mitigated. Even if end-users fail to correctly determine where to send their bug reports, the dev on the other end will have all the correct contact info. This might even make non-issues out of situations such as the XFree86 debacle, where Dawes was complaining about lack of credit for his work.
In short, let’s learn to give credit where credit is due, and assign bugs to those responsible.
Here’s to thousands of free software developers, from all corners of the globe, working on countless and diverse projects, that together create something that is greater than the sum of its parts!!
Debian has released new info: the reason they have not released is due to non Y2K compatiable packages