Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 29th Oct 2009 15:39 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu We're a little late, but Real Life got in the way, so here we finally are. Canonical, the commercial sponsor of Ubuntu, announced today that Ubuntu 9.10 Desktop Edition has been released. This version focusses on improvements in cloud computing on the server using Eucalyptus, further improvements in boot speed, as well as development on Netbook Remix. The related KDE, Xfce, and other variants have been released as well. Update by ELQ: Just a quick note to say that one of my Creative Commons videos was selected to be part of Ubuntu's Free Culture Showcase package that comes by default with the new Ubuntu version!
Thread beginning with comment 391887
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

Quite simply because it will fall on deaf ears. Filing bugs is unwelcoming, hostile and extremely difficult to get any traction for my line of work (UI/X). It’s considered low priority and I get endless kickback from stuck-up geeks who can’t see anything as the end-user does.


And when there are visions set by the projects, the subprojects never step up to meet the requirements. Just look through GNOME where there are a list of projects still relying on deprecated components:

http://www.gnome.org/~fpeters/299.html

Evolution relies on LibGnomeCanvas, the bug notes that someone has worked on porting it to libfoocavas, but nothing has happened since then. It is sitting in limbo with no development happening - something that has been known about for over a year and still no work has been done to remove LibGnomeCanvas as a dependency. Then there is replacing HAL with libudev/gudev - again, many components are still relying on HAL and hardly any of the components have been updated.

So not only are you faced with, as you said, "falls on deaf ears" and even when the bug is acknowledged, no one is willing to work on the unsexy, behind the scenes but fundamentally important components. People talk about the millions of eyes but millions of eyes are useless if bugger all people are contributing anything to improve the situation. Millions of eyes don't get things done, programmers get things done when provided with strong leadership.

Reply Parent Score: 4

StaubSaugerNZ Member since:
2007-07-13

Oh you're right, there are millions of armchair critics, but bugger all people prepared to do any work, sexy or not.

Reply Parent Score: 3

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Oh you're right, there are millions of armchair critics, but bugger all people prepared to do any work, sexy or not.


Of course, which is why paid programmers are important - because the paid programmers look after the things that are unsexy and boring; I'm more disappointed not by the lack of volunteers but the lack of any sizeable development teams from Novell, Red Hat or Canonical doing something about the problem.

I don't blame the volunteer only focusing on what interests them - after all, they're doing it for free and to scratch and itch but I do expect more from vendors who seem to take a heck of a lot from the open source world and do give very little back in addressing the problems that the respective desktops face.

Reply Parent Score: 2

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Yes, and we get a lot of armchair users and even developers that paint over the problems in order to get praised, who repeatedly tell us that the status quo is fine and expect users to pick up open source software and use it in place of other, usually proprietary, software and hype it as a replacement...........as long as there is no criticism.

There are simply a lot of people around open source desktop development who can't take the rough with the smooth.

Reply Parent Score: 2

cycoj Member since:
2007-11-04

Remind me how long has the transition from Carbon to Cocoa been taking? Your comment is simply dishonest, you're suggesting that this sort of transition would be any faster with proprietary software? Get a clue the reason why MS and to a lesser degree Apple keep all these deprecated APIs around is because these transitions are even slower for proprietary software.

Reply Parent Score: 1