Linked by fvillanustre on Fri 6th May 2011 22:19 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 472138
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
If Linux don't want your stuff in the kernel it's not getting there.
Still, there is a huge difference in mentality. Very often, I have code seen shot down in the BSDs for reasons that could be summarized as 'it is not perfect', 'it makes life miserable for VAX users', and 'it does not conform to the BSD/Unix mindset'.
The Linux community has embraced 'perfect is the enemy of good'. While it doesn't conform to a high standard of perfection, it is actually usable for the average person.
How often hasn't Ubuntu been burned for not conforming to the UNIX philosophy, turning Linux in a Windows/OS X clone and whatnot? The fact is that it is probably the most popular desktop system outside Windows and OS X.
Very often, I have code seen shot down in the BSDs for reasons that could be summarized as 'it is not perfect', 'it makes life miserable for VAX users', and 'it does not conform to the BSD/Unix mindset'.
So? The linux camp has their own set of more or less arbitrary reasons for code not being accepted.
How often hasn't Ubuntu been burned for not conforming to the UNIX philosophy, turning Linux in a Windows/OS X clone and whatnot?
Right, and who did that burning? Why isn't the Linux community more open and embracing of Ubuntu's changes? I thought they were so open-minded...





Member since:
2005-08-18
Anyone is allowed to fork the BSD code at any time, this is the same for both Linux and BSD's.
I don't know why people seem to think that Linux is this happy.democratic dreamland where every man and his dogs has commit access. If Linux don't want your stuff in the kernel it's not getting there. This has happened many times before and it will happen again (and there'a nothing wrong with this).