Linked by Amjith Ramanujam on Sun 21st Sep 2008 06:46 UTC, submitted by Rahul
Linux Greg KH, Linux kernel developer delivered a keynote in the Linux plumbing conference about the health of the ecosystem. His message was essentially that distributions that don't contribute to the ecosystem have to rely on the whims of others which is unhealthy for them. Here is an introduction the development model and some interesting statistics about the Linux kernel code. Update by TH: Rebuttals are appearing all over the web, like this one by Canonical's Matt Zimmerman ("He's refuting a claim which has, quite simply, never been made. [...] When this sort of thing happens on mailing lists, it's called trolling."), or this one by another Canonical employee, Dustin Kirkland.
Thread beginning with comment 331026
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Anonymous Penguin
Member since:
2005-07-06

Also, like many have already pointed out, and Shuttleworth is always ready to admit, Ubuntu is only building on the well-tested Debian base.


Right. Then of course one might wonder why they chose Debian Unstable, which by definition is not well-tested.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Dryhte Member since:
2008-02-05

They chose Debian Unstable as a compromise between stability and bleeding edge software.

If they had used Debian Stable, or even Testing, they would be two releases behind on all fast developing software like Firefox, Gnome, music players and what have you.

For me, the main reason I find Ubuntu palatable as a distro is that it offers vast debian-style repositories with more or less bleeding edge software.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

They chose Debian Unstable as a compromise between stability and bleeding edge software.

If they had used Debian Stable, or even Testing, they would be two releases behind on all fast developing software like Firefox, Gnome, music players and what have you.

For me, the main reason I find Ubuntu palatable as a distro is that it offers vast debian-style repositories with more or less bleeding edge software.


Who told you that Debian Testing is two releases behind?
Debian Testing is bleeding edge, quite often with packages newer than Ubuntu.
And how can you say Debian Unstable is a compromise?
What would be in your opinion really bleeding edge? Debian Experimental?
At least get informed before posting.

Reply Parent Score: 4

MamiyaOtaru Member since:
2005-11-11

"They chose Debian Unstable as a compromise between stability and bleeding edge software.

If they had used Debian Stable, or even Testing, they would be two releases behind on all fast developing software like Firefox, Gnome, music players and what have you.
"

Packages generally migrate from Unstable to Testing after a 10 day period without serious bugs. This lets packages be far more up to date than a 5 month old Ubuntu release. It's also the type of policy that would have prevented something like Ubuntu breaking Xorg in an update to their stable distro ( http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=240957 , http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2006/08/ubuntu_xorgcore_updat... ).

Yeah, basing on Stable can leave one behind a bit. Testing? Not so much. Testing seems a much more sensible target to me.

But how often does Ubuntu synch with Debian Anything these days? I don't actually know ;)

Reply Parent Score: 3