Errm Mark Shuttleworth...
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
Of course, it's Shuttleworth and Ubuntu we're talking about.
This is the same distribution that wanted to stick to the "Debian standards", but is now including non-free and proprietary modules/drivers/firmware in their new releases.
Have to love chronic liars
This is the same distribution that wanted to stick to the "Debian standards", but is now including non-free and proprietary modules/drivers/firmware in their new releases.
Have to love chronic liars
According to the developers I've talked with, patches are sent and should show up in PTS, so if it's not you might hound up your infrastructure team for a bit. Also, patches.Ubuntu.com appears to be down (feisty release pretty much affected all Ubuntu services), so that's not good either.
Interestingly, ubnubtu appears to find differences between the two fetchmail packages, but it's not sending them to you. Perhaps because the unstable version is higher than the Ubuntu version, it's not sending you patches? One thing I did notice is that the by_maint doesn't have you, but it does have a pkg-fetchmail-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org, so that might be a problem.
To be fair, there's more to maintain than patches. Identification and triage of bugs is also part of the process, and launchpad does better here, I think. Of course, you might have reservations about using closed source launchpad, but if you can like opera, I can like launchpad
Interestingly, ubnubtu appears to find differences between the two fetchmail packages, but it's not sending them to you. Perhaps because the unstable version is higher than the Ubuntu version, it's not sending you patches? One thing I did notice is that the by_maint doesn't have you, but it does have a pkg-fetchmail-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org, so that might be a problem.
To be fair, there's more to maintain than patches. Identification and triage of bugs is also part of the process, and launchpad does better here, I think. Of course, you might have reservations about using closed source launchpad, but if you can like opera, I can like launchpad
Open source doesn't work by people tracking other changes and include them. That's what it's like with the PTS. I see no problem sending a patch by mail or filing an entry in the BTS. I don't track plaintext files and I guess others won't too.
oh and fetchmail was just an example since I noticed there are changes, I didn't get any patch for other packages too. I also got comments by other developers who feel the same.
Hehe, I have nothing against launchpad
Hehe, I have nothing against launchpad
Then, I hope there's interest in these patches (they're quite monolothic, sadly). I assume you've seen https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuForDebianDevelopers
Tell you what I'd do-- get some of those other developers and maybe attend some of the Open Ubuntu Week sessions as a group. Those that seem most relevant:
Ask Mark - Mark Shuttleworth if you'd like to Mark explain himself (and he hasn't already mailed you privately), I'd imagine he's the best man to approach, but it could take a bit of effort for a group to appear productive rather than merely confrontational.
Patching Packages - Martin Pitt Sounds like he might have some clues on what's going on and how implement improvements.
Noticably absent is any sort of Debian session, but I think they make a point of going where the developers are rather than wait for interested individuals to come forward (ie Debconf sessions), rather than assume everything's hunky dory.
Tell you what I'd do-- get some of those other developers and maybe attend some of the Open Ubuntu Week sessions as a group. Those that seem most relevant:
Ask Mark - Mark Shuttleworth if you'd like to Mark explain himself (and he hasn't already mailed you privately), I'd imagine he's the best man to approach, but it could take a bit of effort for a group to appear productive rather than merely confrontational.
Patching Packages - Martin Pitt Sounds like he might have some clues on what's going on and how implement improvements.
Noticably absent is any sort of Debian session, but I think they make a point of going where the developers are rather than wait for interested individuals to come forward (ie Debconf sessions), rather than assume everything's hunky dory.
I'm not entirely sure wether or not that is a lie.
Some developers might not like ubuntu to automatically send them their patches.
But their patches are easily available on launchpad.
I really wish they release launchpad's source. I would expect debian to switch to launchpad the day they release the source. Esspecially with the bug triaging it will help a lot.
Secondly, some packages are not taken from Debian, but taken directly upstream.
I should assume they only send patches upstream, instead of to debian, if debian is using a different version.
Thirdly, not all patches immidiately apply to debian. If some of the dependencies (like say python) are more up-to-date than debian's than it doesn't make sense to spam debian developper about them (until they have transistioned to the same toolchain). Esspecially the toolchain with Ubuntu is very up-to-date. Half of the broken packages are due to Ubuntu using more up-to-date compilers, interpreters, etc, than debian.
Fourthly, communication per package is off course the responsibility of the ubuntu package maintainer, some might be lacking.
In all cases, trying to do something, and doing it perfectly are two different things: it does not mean he is lying.
Sidenote: about lie-ing about wether or not they accept debian's standards of freedom is stretching it very far. Shuttleworth has been very clear about when and why restricted hardware will be supported: if its stable, and is a needed dependency of lots of good free software. Restricted wireless drivers means more than half the user can use firefox, ephiphany, democracytv, etc. on their laptop. Restricted 3d drivers mean people can use beryl, compiz, nexuiz, etc. Lastly, users are being informed that the driver they are using (or could be using) is restricted, and what this means for stability and their freedom. In the future they will also 'advertize' hardware that does have free drivers available. Also, the next version of Ubuntu will have a special super-free flavour which will enforce freedom.
I actually agree with that strategy. Don't blame the users, for the faults of the hardware industry. Educate those users, and paint the hw-vendors as brands that do not really want to support their users.
Lastly, Shuttleworth considered sponsering Debian to focus more on timely releases on the desktop. He eventually decided not to do that because it would 'hurt' debian. That too makes sense. Debian is an all purposes distrobution with a slow release cycle supporting more platforms than any other platform. That should stay the way it is.
If the integration between Ubuntu and Debian should be improved, I would say that debian testing should sync with Ubuntu instead of Debian Unstable. Focussing merely on supporting those platforms and packages ubuntu does not support and then releasing it as stable.
To finish off, please note that the majority of Ubuntu users are windows-convert. They are not stealing Debian's thunder or anything. You are not fighting for the same users. Or at least, this specific group wouldn't and didn't switch to Debian before Ubuntu came along. Keep that in mind.
Thats just my two cents.
Some developers might not like ubuntu to automatically send them their patches.
But their patches are easily available on launchpad.
I really wish they release launchpad's source. I would expect debian to switch to launchpad the day they release the source. Esspecially with the bug triaging it will help a lot.
Secondly, some packages are not taken from Debian, but taken directly upstream.
I should assume they only send patches upstream, instead of to debian, if debian is using a different version.
Thirdly, not all patches immidiately apply to debian. If some of the dependencies (like say python) are more up-to-date than debian's than it doesn't make sense to spam debian developper about them (until they have transistioned to the same toolchain). Esspecially the toolchain with Ubuntu is very up-to-date. Half of the broken packages are due to Ubuntu using more up-to-date compilers, interpreters, etc, than debian.
Fourthly, communication per package is off course the responsibility of the ubuntu package maintainer, some might be lacking.
In all cases, trying to do something, and doing it perfectly are two different things: it does not mean he is lying.
Sidenote: about lie-ing about wether or not they accept debian's standards of freedom is stretching it very far. Shuttleworth has been very clear about when and why restricted hardware will be supported: if its stable, and is a needed dependency of lots of good free software. Restricted wireless drivers means more than half the user can use firefox, ephiphany, democracytv, etc. on their laptop. Restricted 3d drivers mean people can use beryl, compiz, nexuiz, etc. Lastly, users are being informed that the driver they are using (or could be using) is restricted, and what this means for stability and their freedom. In the future they will also 'advertize' hardware that does have free drivers available. Also, the next version of Ubuntu will have a special super-free flavour which will enforce freedom.
I actually agree with that strategy. Don't blame the users, for the faults of the hardware industry. Educate those users, and paint the hw-vendors as brands that do not really want to support their users.
Lastly, Shuttleworth considered sponsering Debian to focus more on timely releases on the desktop. He eventually decided not to do that because it would 'hurt' debian. That too makes sense. Debian is an all purposes distrobution with a slow release cycle supporting more platforms than any other platform. That should stay the way it is.
If the integration between Ubuntu and Debian should be improved, I would say that debian testing should sync with Ubuntu instead of Debian Unstable. Focussing merely on supporting those platforms and packages ubuntu does not support and then releasing it as stable.
To finish off, please note that the majority of Ubuntu users are windows-convert. They are not stealing Debian's thunder or anything. You are not fighting for the same users. Or at least, this specific group wouldn't and didn't switch to Debian before Ubuntu came along. Keep that in mind.
Thats just my two cents.
I see no point in that the patches are available easily even not in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuForDebianDevelopers.
OpenSource works because people modifying stuff send their changes back to upstream. It's not my work to track changes of other distributions. If you are upstream developer (and that's what I am for package information), they should send their changes directly to me, if not they should send it to upstream. If you are upstream you also don't want to look after all patches flying around in the wild. Really this should not be the start of a flamewar, I really don't see a need for this but I think it's not correct to build up a better view on this stuff in the media if it's not that cool.
OpenSource works because people modifying stuff send their changes back to upstream. It's not my work to track changes of other distributions. If you are upstream developer (and that's what I am for package information), they should send their changes directly to me, if not they should send it to upstream. If you are upstream you also don't want to look after all patches flying around in the wild. Really this should not be the start of a flamewar, I really don't see a need for this but I think it's not correct to build up a better view on this stuff in the media if it's not that cool.
Nico,
of course you have a point. "Sending patches" is not the same as "providing patches", and I also wish the ubuntu guys were more precise when doing PR related talk about this.
But what also makes me sick is the animosity of the debian folks in regard to this. Why is everything thats not formulated with 100% precision always boldly dismissed as "lying"?! Can't you just state that it's "not true" and correct the mistakes? After all ubuntu and debian are not enemies.
of course you have a point. "Sending patches" is not the same as "providing patches", and I also wish the ubuntu guys were more precise when doing PR related talk about this.
But what also makes me sick is the animosity of the debian folks in regard to this. Why is everything thats not formulated with 100% precision always boldly dismissed as "lying"?! Can't you just state that it's "not true" and correct the mistakes? After all ubuntu and debian are not enemies.
It is not everything a lie which is formulated with 100% precision but in fact they support debian with this or not, that has nothing to do with precision in my opinion. I am pretty sure that Shuttleworth thinks about what he writes before he does. Oh and no, I don't see debian and ubuntu as enemies that's why I didn't rant before. It has advantages and disadvantages.
Add Comment
Calendar
|
November '15 | |||||
| Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | Sun |
| 1 | ||||||
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
| 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
| 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | ||||||
Quicksearch
Support
Recent Entries
- E-Plus GSM privacy/TMSI allocation leak
- Thursday, October 11 2012
- Exploiting the Ubiquisys/SFR femtocell webserver (wsal/shttpd/mongoose/yassl embedded webserver)
- Wednesday, August 3 2011
- So what happened recently...
- Wednesday, April 6 2011
- Sunday, February 6 2011
- exim remote vulnerability
- Thursday, December 9 2010
- Will my Phone Show An Unencrypted Connection?
- Wednesday, September 8 2010
- smpCTF 2010 quals writeups
- Sunday, August 8 2010
- protocol design fail: MMS notification
- Wednesday, July 28 2010
- acrobat reader stealing my passwords
- Tuesday, June 29 2010
- UnrealIRCd backdoored
- Saturday, June 12 2010
Syndicate This Blog
Categories
Tag cloud
23c3 acpi advertising annouce announce april argh art awards bash blogging bugs c cli code conferences config configuration data mining debconf debian dell dns documentation email errm? events exploit fail fail2ban filesharing films flame fun gcc google graphs grml gsm hacking hacks hardware heise images information installation internet irc knowledge libacpi links linux mobile phones network news newsbeuter omg open source opera passwords php power privacy programming qa random blurb rant release releases rss scripts security service setup shell sms software spam ssh stfl stuff terminal tests text mode tip tips tools troubleshooting unix user video vim.editing web web 2.0 websites wordpress wtf www youtube zsh