"At a recent Australian Linux conference, Sam Varghese reported that two Debian developers pointed out that the Debian Project needs more corporate support for 'men, money and machines' to advance the operating system. They're right. It does. They also pointed out that many companies, such as HP, IBM, Silicon Graphics and Google, either use Debian Linux internally, or actually incorporate it into products. For example, HP uses Debian 'Etch' 4.0 in its new t5735 thin-client device. Right again. Debian, either directly or through related Linux distributions such as Xandros, is used both by Linux enthusiasts and Fortune 500 companies. Of course, you couldn't prove that by the vast majority of Debian developers who never see a thin dime from their Debian work. Or, I should add, get access to new hardware, travel expenses to Debian developer conferences and so on."
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-02-26
I've nothing against Vaughan-Nichols, but I agree that this article was unnecessarily negative.
One key line I took away from it:
"...does keep going" is what matters. They may be a victim of their unique culture in some aspects, but they continue to be successful as a result of it.
Member since:2005-07-08
Hmm... I didn't find the article so very negative. It also depends on how you want to see it: as plain criticism only, or as a potential starting point for constructive discussion in order to maybe find some new ideas and vision. I took the article in the latter way.
In my opinion the Debian project would be worth more financial, hardware etc. support. But do some Debian people even want that?
As a bazaar like organization Debian seems too heterogenous to accept any bigger changes in its old habits. If somebody finds a new model, for financial support, for example, usually there are plenty of others who oppose it. The Anthony Towns example points that clearly.
Free open discussion is very important, of course, but in Debian it often seems to result in conservatism and certain lack of bigger vision. Things just continue the old way like people are used to doing them.
Debian democracy is alright and even a very good model when that sort of democracy works - but nobody can deny that sometimes Debian has been having quite big problems too. (as a small example, where is the Debian Weekly News nowadays? "doesn't appear to have been published since July 3, 2007") Debian is one of my all time favorite distros, and I just hope that some of the bigger problems it has had could be avoided, what ever the right way might be?
Member since:2006-05-12
I am not familiar with Vaughan-Nichols, but maybe he cares because he would like to see Debian improve.
If his points are valid, I don't think they should be overlooked in favor of smearing him instead.
Sure Ubuntu has corporate support, but the worth of a distro is determined in large part by the package manager it uses, and Ubuntu uses debians.
Debian works the way it is, but I think many companies are reluctant to launch mission critical services on Ubuntu server, it is considered a "desktop distro" and I don't think they respect it as a big iron solution.
Many of the people who are familiar with Ubuntu would probably prefer to managing Debian server to Red Hat or Solaris.
I think it would be cool to see some companies get behind Debian and deploy products on it, and likely so does Vaughan-Nichols.
Member since:2006-03-23
lots of companies actually use debian, i know quite a few.
and the reasons are obvious, they can install debian stable, setup their shit, and then just add a note in the calender a few years later when that server is no longer needed, or a few changes may be needed.
however, they dont go broadcast that they use debian, they just use it.
They dont give money or any other support to debian, which is their right, even though we might think debian deserves it(which they surely do).
Debian keeps going anyway, which just shows that one can trust them, and i would trust them any day to look after my freedoms, and make sure i dont get into a closed-software-hell without specifically knowing it. AKA - if i dont specifically add non-free, i wont get nonfree crap.
Member since:2006-01-02
Vaughn-Nichols is a bit of a hack: http://fakesteve.blogspot.com/2007/12/more-shameless-copying-by-ewe....
Member since:
2005-11-05
The author of this article, Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, has been highly critical of Debian in the past. It might not be fair to say he hates Debian, but it wouldn't be miles away from the mark either. So we don't have an exactly fair hearing here.
He also overlooks one thing. If you don't have much or any money and no "board of directors" who are obvious targets, people tend not to sue you. Giving a grant to Debian could merely fatten then up for patent trolls and all the rest, something Debian people are keenly aware of.
Finally, it's a (partly) free world so what's the problem? If Debian want to do things their way, why shouldn't they? As a Debian user I have every reason to be grateful for it, though personally I would prefer to see a bit more organization, a little more of a chain of command, and a higher-profile Debian Project Leader (folks who become the DPL seem promptly to disappear into a black hole). However, that's just my 2 cents and no more significant than that.
If Ubuntu wants to take up where Debian leaves off, then good luck to them. In truth, though, the jury is still a long way out as to whether Ubuntu will be able to do that. It's clear that the project has problems of its down. In my experience, so far, Debian Testing has consistently provided a more stable desktop OS than any version of Ubuntu I've tried/