2013/6/18 Steve Langasek <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 05:13:33PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> I think Jonathon's post earlier today captures the core issue:
>> On Monday, June 17, 2013 09:05:08 PM Jonathan Riddell wrote:
>> As long as Canonical declines to work with the rest of the free software
> Well, I think that's an altogether inaccurate and unfair characterization.
> Canonical has always been open to working with "the rest of the free
> software community"; what Canonical has not been willing to do is blindly
> follow where certain self-appointed "upstreams" would lead, when that
> conflicts with the business's goals.
Well, working with the upstreams (who usually know their code best),
making compromises, trying to convince upstreams that the way you
think something should be designed is best and finally, if there is a
consensus, implement that code and make it available to everyone is
basically the essence of "working with "the rest of the free software
community"". It has never been easy, and if upstreams reject certain
features, people are free to fork. But the dicussion needs to happen
first and stuff needs to be implemented closely to upstream, so
everyone knows about it and it can be accepted easily.
Especially the communication step was missing in the Wayland story.
Just my 2ct.
ubuntu-devel mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel