Mark Shuttleworth could not or did not want to contain and on Friday, in an article published on his personal blog, was dispatched at ease against “those” detractors who have come to Ubuntu recent times. Canonical big boss called the ‘Tea Party’ of Open Source and, as we told you, the responses were immediate.
Specifically, we echoed the challenge launched by Aaron Seigo-one of the best known developers of the KDE project-in which, despite the redundancy, Mark Shuttleworth challenged an open debate on Mir. The reason, it seems to pin all Shuttleworth Mir opposition to political issues , and there are several significant detractors who do not share that view.
statements contained DesdeLinux Lennart Poettering, creator of SystemD, and Martin GRASSLIN, KWin maintainer. Both agree in emphasizing the reference made by Shuttleworth to “the torturers of the English language,” one South African millionaire reminding everyone not born in a country with English as mother tongue , the other taking it up to Matthew Garrett, the Red Hat exdesarrollador earlier this month unveiled XMir problems: “You complain about my english, but heck, Matthew is Cambridge …” Poettering dropped.
However, not only Mark Shuttleworth has been answered, also has given, in his blog, to some of the comments that passed the moderation of the site. The GRASSLIN Martin, who also left his, not one of the “lucky”, but there are critics and Shuttleworth responses , as happened with the item of contention, no waste.
Shuttleworth to Mir attacks are purely political , a commentary accused is “ironic and hypocritical” claiming that, since “the only reason that there Mir is politics. ” Shuttleworth’s response:
The reason for the existence of Mir is Wayland end I see the same problems with the X. [...] In addition, I worry that the people who finance the project have a very specific agenda and no intention of leaving Canonical succeed if they can help . Mir has a goal and is a small development. Their existence should not offend anyone. The fact that it has become a major problem is the measure of how much is going on behind the curtains.
policy issue resurfaces in the conversation:
I agree that people can choose to use something else other than Mir for reasons other politicians. [...] But when someone says “it would be better if he had written this free software”, you got to think “ why would anyone not want to have that option? “. If you dig into the matter you will realize that [the opponents] are usually working to secure control over a particular part of stack , and the existence of an alternative spoil that plan.
Neither you nor I can tell you right now why code base is better. I think it’s healthy that projects have an open mind. When a project says “we will not accept a patch to support Mir” [You mean Intel?] Are saying you should not have that option . When I make a project that makes every effort to provide its users with all the [Refers to Ubuntu], again, suggest that there is a political motive.
coinciding with a comment we recently dejabais to SystemD reason and rejection of Ubuntu to it, even though it uses the distribution , Shuttleworth, who called it “highly invasive and difficult to justify” – says:
SystemD of ideas that we believe is really bad is that includes a bunch of disparate pieces of technology in the same process . So a lot of pieces of code that previously independent which are under the control of the people working in SystemD , have been incorporated into the code base. But it is still possible to build separate packages from different parts of the code, which is what we do. Upstart That way you can still use that functionality, but Upstart itself is clean and simple.
incident then that Mir and Wayland can coexist without problems , remember that GNOME and Ubuntu are not competitors , as if they are Canonical and Red Hat or Canonical and Intel (citing Tizen), and concludes with a reflection on the subject of the Tea Party, here and now, we have plenty. Will the soap opera? No doubt about it, but while there are solid arguments background-and it seems that if any-starts, so be it.
Meanwhile, Jono Bacon, Ubuntu Community Manager, has been launched with a call to the good feeling that we’ll see if it stays, but currently has been welcomed.
I who left endpoint in this information to give a little of my opinion, I wonder how there can be a compromise between the frontage and the ‘vibes’ a little child (hey, all respect for Jono Bacon, Lo Curro that much)? That is, think Canonical has the right to try to Mir, but the underlying reason is politics -or control, that after all comes to the same thing-and non-technical ( sorry , Mark ).
Simultaneously, open discussion centered técino be beneficial aspect to oxygenate this situation. Ultimately, Canonical is a company with its own interests, such as Red Hat, and do not have to stick to a common calendar if not according to those interests. Put silver, whether Wayland is proving superior to Mir, Canonical best strategy may still develop their own solution by various factors, including the time .
Note: What’s “rebel with a cause” is just a little joke by that article that included Mark Shuttleworth Forbes in its list of “technological rebels” a list of people who “disturb” the field in which they are working … And what if you do. Although this is not the most accurate example of what was meant in the economic publication.
Unfortunately, this mess has coincided with the ninth anniversary of Ubuntu , held these days … And it is beyond dispute and other stories, which nobody can deny is the important work out by “Linux for human beings” during this time. The balance is positive in any case, and that has to count for something, right? Yes or no?