Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 14th May 2010 22:23 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu "UDS is over! And in the customary wrap-up I stood up and told the audience what the Foundations team have been discussing all week. One of the items is almost certainly going to get a little bit of publicity. We are going to be doing the work to have btrfs as an installation option, and we have not ruled out making it the default. I do stress the emphasis of that statement, a number of things would have to be true for us to take that decision."
Thread beginning with comment 424719
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Great!
by macinnisrr on Sat 15th May 2010 20:54 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Great!"
macinnisrr
Member since:
2009-11-12

Well, we all know that *most software is seen in fedora before ubuntu, but the suggestion that Ubuntu uses or builds upon fedora is ludicrous. Ubuntu is based on Debian. Any time Mark Shuttleworth outlines the issues that need to be worked on in the next release, the developers in question use debian testing/unstable as the base for these changes. For instance: Mark wanted a better graphical boot experience. The devs looked into debian testing and grabbed plymouth. I know Redhat, and hence fedora, developed this piece of software, but if it wasn't in debian at some point, ubuntu wouldn't have used it.
<p>
I see so many comments here about how ubuntu "steals" from fedora that I can't ignore them any longer. Red Hat (and hence fedora), are THE top suppliers of ENTERPRISE linux, and as such, have more developers working not only on existing FOSS technologies, but also coming up with new software, to suit their goals and clients. This is the nature of FOSS. Just because I use your software to make something better suited to my particular situation, which may not be YOUR priority, but which may also cause bug reports to be filed upstream (mostly by inexperienced bug filers), does not mean I'm stealing. Isn't this the entire reason we all wanted to use FOSS in the first place?

In conclusion, and as a developer who both causes problems for upstream and hears about problems downstream; RELAX!!!! If you can't handle a few (or many) emails a day asking what's wrong, and subsequently redirect them to the people who know about the problem (or fix them yourself, as many bugs filed upstream are only found out when used by more people downstream), you either need more people working on your project (which you should ALREADY be grateful for), or should probably go to work for a closed-source proprietary company like Apple (they never hear about anything downstream, or don't listen).
<p>
DickMacInnis.com

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: Great!
by Fettarme H-Milch on Sat 15th May 2010 23:30 in reply to "RE[5]: Great!"
Fettarme H-Milch Member since:
2010-02-16

Well, we all know that *most software is seen in fedora before ubuntu, but the suggestion that Ubuntu uses or builds upon fedora is ludicrous. Ubuntu is based on Debian.

Learn to read. Nobody wrote that Ubuntu is based on Fedora. Ubuntu uses specific features from Fedora (like Plymouth). Many features Ubuntu uses may be in default Debian, but are primarily developed by Red Hat with Fedora in mind: For example Red Hat tries to make Nouveau 3D "good enough" for compositing window managers in Fedora 14.
As Fedora is always released ~1 month after Ubuntu, that's too late for Ubuntu 10.10.
Even with smaller financial resources, Canonical could assign a developer to also work on Nouveau and finish that work a month earlier in time for 10.10. Canonical does not do that. Canonical employs people but only very, very few of them participate in upstream FOSS projects.
Comparing the work force, Mandriva and Canonical are roughly equal in size (~100 employees), but despite Canonical's much deeper pockets, Mandriva is ahead of Canonical in every FOSS contributions statistic I know.

go to work for a closed-source proprietary company like Apple

Apple (co-)develops WebKit, CUPS, GCC, LLVM, and much more. Strange that a "closed-source proprietary company" contributes much more to FOSS than Canonical...

DickMacInnis.com

Stop spamming.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[7]: Great!
by Rahul on Sun 16th May 2010 10:02 in reply to "RE[6]: Great!"
Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06

I should note that Canonical has more than 300 employees. Not 100.

http://www.linkedin.com/companies/canonical-ltd

Not sure of the organization split of developers vs others but you can make rough estimates

Reply Parent Score: 2