Manoj Srivastava writes (Re: Canonical's business model):
What would I *like* to see? Well, that they treat me like I
treat my upstreams; I triage bug reports, I keep feature specific
patches separate, I submit these feature requests to upstream BTS,
or upstream author, depending
Le dimanche 15 janvier 2006 à 19:55 +0200, Martin-Éric Racine a écrit :
I personally appreciate the excellent work done by Ubuntu. Just looking
at major GNOME improvements that directly resulted from Ubuntu efforts
(by Debian Developers such as Sébastien Bacher) clearly shows how Ubuntu
helps
[David Nusinow]
As far as I know this wasn't any corporate decision by Canonical to
give back to Debian, but it was a personal decision by Daniel to
help me (for which I'm immensely grateful).
I do not really understand this kind of reasoning. I get the
impression that you see a difference
On Sun, Jan 15, 2006 at 01:28:26PM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[David Nusinow]
As far as I know this wasn't any corporate decision by Canonical to
give back to Debian, but it was a personal decision by Daniel to
help me (for which I'm immensely grateful).
I do not really understand
Hi Matt,
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 02:34:31PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Ubuntu could report in the BTS all the bugs it finds, and submit patches
via the BTS.
[...]
Many patches are submitted via the BTS, though not every patch published in
On 1/15/06, Martin-Éric Racine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Many patches are submitted via the BTS, though not every patch published in
the patch archive is submitted this way, for reasons which have been
discussed to death in previous threads.
What I think could be done in a significantly
On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 09:03:24PM -0200, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
Having said that, I'd also like to have non-ubuntu-specific patches be
fed to our BTS; that would really make me feel there's a strong policy
of giving back. While my relationship with people at ubuntu working on
gksu is
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:48:21 +0100, martin f krafft
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO, the border between contributing and employing people who also
work on Debian is not entirely clear.
How do you think Canonical could *better* work with Debian, ignoring
whether they meet up to their promises at the
Can't Canonical devote resources to better Ubuntu's contribution to debian? This seems like a reasonable request since Canonical crows about how they are the number one linux distro and they have excellent support, but surely the reliability of their product rests upon the reliability of
On Jan 12, Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The relevant context is generally available in the changelog (which is in
At least for my packages, this is often false.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know that sometimes users do the wrong thing in spite of this, and that's
unfortunate. However, given that I've never received an inappropriate
message from an Ubuntu user about one of my packages in Debian at my
Maintainer: email address, it seems
On 1/11/06, Daniel Ruoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 14:36 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG escreveu:
Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It was already discussed[0], and there's no consensus on this idea of
every Ubuntu changeset, a patch in Debian BTS between DDs.
On 1/11/06, Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(...)
I don't
remember Linspire, Progeny, ... employees doing the same thing so it
makes no sense rant against Canonical only.
On the other hand, Linspire and Progeny do not pretend to be
On 1/11/06, Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 03:25:01PM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
(...)
Are you saying that they're spending more money with PR than really
contributing back ?
I don't know about money, but I'm pretty sure their claims exceed
their
On 1/11/06, Gustavo Noronha Silva [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 19:54 -0300, Daniel Ruoso escreveu:
Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 14:36 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG escreveu:
Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It was already discussed[0], and there's no consensus on this
On 1/11/06, Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 05:48:22PM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
On 1/11/06, Daniel Ruoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 16:48 +0100, martin f krafft escreveu:
What would you like to see?
I think submitting bugs and
On 1/12/06, Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gustavo Franco wrote:
I agree with similar things being said but i'm yet to hear about the
lack of collaboration and give Debian something back. For example: I
don't remember too much people caring about PGI (Progeny) and after
that anaconda
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:48:22 -0200, Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On 1/11/06, Daniel Ruoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 16:48 +0100, martin f krafft escreveu:
What would you like to see?
I think submitting bugs and patches to the BTS would already be
enough.
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:17:55 -0200, Gustavo Franco
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I disagree with a pile of patches and as i said it would be better a
revision control system and good log (and debian/changelog) entries.
How is a revision control system (BTW, all of my packages are
in a
On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 11:47:53AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
On 1/11/06, Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course people can do this, but this is so very much not the point. The
point is that publishing source packages on a website that people have to
poll is not giving back to
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gustavo Franco wrote:
I agree with similar things being said but i'm yet to hear about the
lack of collaboration and give Debian something back. For example: I
don't remember too much people caring about PGI (Progeny) and after
that anaconda port to say
David Nusinow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The greatest strength of having Canonical on our side, from my POV, is that
it's a company full of people like Daniel, who are fundamentally Debian
people, and who are willing to work with you on this kind of personal
level. I don't really buy in to
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Gustavo Franco wrote:
I see, i would like to see the utnubu patch list[0] integrated in PTS
(scott's already is[1]), with that everyone subscribed to the package
The patch list from utnubu is the same than the one from Scott, so there's
no point to add a pointer to the
Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 21:18 -0500, Joey Hess escreveu:
Gustavo Franco wrote:
I agree with similar things being said but i'm yet to hear about the
lack of collaboration and give Debian something back. For example: I
don't remember too much people caring about PGI (Progeny) and after
that
Thomas Bushnell writes:
No, I think it's because Ubuntu doesn't cooperate well with Debian,
while pretending to cooperate.
Does Debian want to cooperate with Ubuntu, and how well does Debian
do? What steps could Ubuntu and Debian reasonably take to improve
cooperation?
Jan.
--
Jan
On 1/11/06, Jan Nieuwenhuizen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thomas Bushnell writes:
No, I think it's because Ubuntu doesn't cooperate well with Debian,
while pretending to cooperate.
Does Debian want to cooperate with Ubuntu, and how well does Debian
do? What steps could Ubuntu and Debian
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 10:25 +0100, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
Thomas Bushnell writes:
No, I think it's because Ubuntu doesn't cooperate well with Debian,
while pretending to cooperate.
Could you be more explicit? I know there has been concern about Ubuntu amongst debian
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 02:44:28PM +0100, jeremiah foster wrote:
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 10:25 +0100, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
Thomas Bushnell writes:
No, I think it's because Ubuntu doesn't cooperate well with Debian,
while pretending to cooperate.
Could you be more explicit? I
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:07:43AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
On 1/10/06, Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:22:03AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
I don't[sic] the same rant over others Debian related companies
Have you ever actually subscribed to any
On 1/11/06, Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:07:43AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
On 1/10/06, Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:22:03AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
I don't[sic] the same rant over others Debian related
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 02:56:35PM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
On 1/11/06, Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:07:43AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
On 1/10/06, Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:22:03AM -0200, Gustavo
On 1/11/06, Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 02:56:35PM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
On 1/11/06, Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:07:43AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
On 1/10/06, Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 02:44:28PM +0100, jeremiah foster wrote:
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 10:25 +0100, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
Thomas Bushnell writes:
No, I think it's because Ubuntu doesn't cooperate well with Debian,
while pretending to cooperate.
Could you be more explicit? I
also sprach Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.01.11.1644 +0100]:
Could you be more explicit? I know there has been concern about Ubuntu
amongst debian developers, and that Mark Shuttleworth has some doubts
about working with DCC, although he is rather vague in my opinion. But
what
Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 16:48 +0100, martin f krafft escreveu:
What would you like to see?
I think submitting bugs and patches to the BTS would already be enough.
daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Jan 11, martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How do you think Canonical could *better* work with Debian, ignoring
whether they meet up to their promises at the moment or not.
E.g. when I repeatedly say I'd like to receive any change you make to
my packages, in any form you find
On 1/11/06, Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 11, martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How do you think Canonical could *better* work with Debian, ignoring
whether they meet up to their promises at the moment or not.
E.g. when I repeatedly say I'd like to receive any change
On Jan 11, Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
E.g. when I repeatedly say I'd like to receive any change you make to
my packages, in any form you find convenient they could actually do
it... I'm tired of begging for patches.
http://utnubu.alioth.debian.org/scottish/by_maint/[EMAIL
On 1/11/06, Daniel Ruoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 16:48 +0100, martin f krafft escreveu:
What would you like to see?
I think submitting bugs and patches to the BTS would already be enough.
It was already discussed[0], and there's no consensus on this idea of
every
On 1/11/06, Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 11, Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
E.g. when I repeatedly say I'd like to receive any change you make to
my packages, in any form you find convenient they could actually do
it... I'm tired of begging for patches.
On Jan 11, Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You said *in any form you find convenient* but which one do you
prefer: bug reports through Debian BTS, just email, ... ? Please, read
my reply to Daniel's message.
Uploading the diffs on a web server is nice, but it's not much more
different
On 1/11/06, Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 11, Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You said *in any form you find convenient* but which one do you
prefer: bug reports through Debian BTS, just email, ... ? Please, read
my reply to Daniel's message.
Uploading the diffs on
Jan Nieuwenhuizen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thomas Bushnell writes:
No, I think it's because Ubuntu doesn't cooperate well with Debian,
while pretending to cooperate.
Does Debian want to cooperate with Ubuntu, and how well does Debian
do? What steps could Ubuntu and Debian reasonably take
Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It was already discussed[0], and there's no consensus on this idea of
every Ubuntu changeset, a patch in Debian BTS between DDs.
Right. I want Ubuntu to exercise judgment, and not just give a big
pile of patches, some of which are Debian-relevant and
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 03:25:01PM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
On 1/11/06, Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 02:56:35PM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
On 1/11/06, Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:07:43AM -0200, Gustavo
Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 14:36 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG escreveu:
Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It was already discussed[0], and there's no consensus on this idea of
every Ubuntu changeset, a patch in Debian BTS between DDs.
Right. I want Ubuntu to exercise judgment, and not just
Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 19:54 -0300, Daniel Ruoso escreveu:
Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 14:36 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG escreveu:
Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It was already discussed[0], and there's no consensus on this idea of
every Ubuntu changeset, a patch in Debian BTS between
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 02:34:31PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Ubuntu could report in the BTS all the bugs it finds, and submit patches
via the BTS.
As you know, most bugs are reported by users, not discovered by developers
We direct users to report those bugs to us, rather than Debian,
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 07:54:10PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
This is exactly the point, what can I do with a patch if I don't know
why it's there? Which problem is it trying to address (I know, I can
read the patch and guess, but WTF), and why such solution was adopted...
Everytime I submit a
On 1/11/06, Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I think it's because Ubuntu doesn't cooperate well with Debian,
while pretending to cooperate.
Does Debian want to cooperate with Ubuntu, and how well does Debian
do? What steps could Ubuntu and Debian reasonably take to
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 05:48:22PM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
On 1/11/06, Daniel Ruoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 16:48 +0100, martin f krafft escreveu:
What would you like to see?
I think submitting bugs and patches to the BTS would already be enough.
It was
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:48:21 +0100, martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
What would you like to see?
What would I *like* to see? Well, that they treat me like I
treat my upstreams; I triage bug reports, I keep feature specific
patches separate, I submit these feature requests to
Daniel Ruoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 14:36 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG escreveu:
Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It was already discussed[0], and there's no consensus on this idea of
every Ubuntu changeset, a patch in Debian BTS between DDs.
Right. I want
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 02:34:31PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Ubuntu could report in the BTS all the bugs it finds, and submit patches
via the BTS.
As you know, most bugs are reported by users, not discovered by developers
We direct users to
Reinhard Tartler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 1/11/06, Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I think it's because Ubuntu doesn't cooperate well with Debian,
while pretending to cooperate.
Does Debian want to cooperate with Ubuntu, and how well does Debian
do? What steps
Gustavo Franco wrote:
I agree with similar things being said but i'm yet to hear about the
lack of collaboration and give Debian something back. For example: I
don't remember too much people caring about PGI (Progeny) and after
that anaconda port to say that they weren't contributing the
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 06:09:25PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As you know, most bugs are reported by users, not discovered by developers
We direct users to report those bugs to us, rather than Debian, for obvious
reasons.
Really? I get not
[Most of the replies from people appear to have completely missed the
point, but I'll just pick up on this one because it's not so far
off...]
On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 11:52:43AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
It's also important to not completely conflate the people who work for
Canonical with the
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:22:03AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
I don't[sic] the same rant over others Debian related companies
Have you ever actually subscribed to any Debian mailing lists?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `'
On 1/10/06, Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:22:03AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
I don't[sic] the same rant over others Debian related companies
Have you ever actually subscribed to any Debian mailing lists?
Hi Andrew,
Don't be fooled by From mail
Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's up to Canonical how they will contribute back to the community,
IMHO. I don't the same rant over others Debian related companies so
i'm assuming that we're wasting time shooting Canonical, (mainly)
because Ubuntu is sucessful.
No, I think it's
Le lundi 09 janvier 2006 à 06:58 +, Andrew Suffield a écrit :
...damnit, I never thought of that. And you know why not? Because on
some level I thought that all the noise they make about 'contributing
back to Debian' was more than just lip service. I had (stupidly)
wanted to believe that
On Monday 09 January 2006 10:02, Josselin Mouette wrote:
This is fair. After all, that's what Free software is about. But I know
for sure that contributing back to Debian stuff is 100% talk and 0%
reality.
There is at least one area where there is a substantial contribution from
people
Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 09 January 2006 10:02, Josselin Mouette wrote:
This is fair. After all, that's what Free software is about. But I know
for sure that contributing back to Debian stuff is 100% talk and 0%
reality.
There is at least one area where there is a
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 10:30:07PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
They're investing in writing better tools, and they're keeping them
private so as to maintain a competative advantage with them over Red
Hat, SuSE, Fedora, and so forth. Including Debian,
On 09-Jan-06, 13:52 (CST), Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that more than one thing can be going on at once.
There are commercial companies that keep things secret for competative
advantage and *also* contribute other things back to the broader
community. IBM, for instance,
On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 11:52:43AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
As such, I think getting upset at them is fundamentally missing the
point. Companies act like companies, sooner or later. Companies are
fundamentally economic. I don't mind them buying goodwill -- the only
actions a company
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I agree with most of what you've said, except for the assertion that
individual people are fundamentally different in this respect. Debian
developers, in general, work on Debian in their spare time, and make
their living by other means. Often these
Canonical's business model doesn't belong in -devel. If Canonical as a
company is being fair, cool, whatever with Debian project i think we
can discuss it in -project, but why not do the same exercise about
Linspire? Do they sponsor conferences? Oh, i think Canonical does it
too.
It's up
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 10:30:07PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
They're investing in writing better tools, and they're keeping them
private so as to maintain a competative advantage with them over Red Hat,
SuSE, Fedora, and so forth. Including Debian, for that matter.
...damnit, I never thought
70 matches
Mail list logo
