Re: [Ilugc] Canonical Not Great Contributor

2008-09-28 Thread Satish Chandra
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 7:29 AM, Swapnil Bhartiya [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: I just learnt from a friend of mine that I should stop using Ubuntu as Canonical is not contributing to the development of GNU/Linux systems as compared to other players. He also suggested that since most of its stuff,

Re: [Ilugc] Canonical Not Great Contributor

2008-09-28 Thread technocraze
I just learnt from a friend of mine that I should stop using Ubuntu as Canonical is not contributing to the development of GNU/Linux systems as compared to other players. He also suggested that since most of its stuff, or nothing, is upstream so we cant trust it. Also his argument was, being

Re: [Ilugc] Canonical Not Great Contributor

2008-09-28 Thread Aanjhan R
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 3:59 AM, Swapnil Bhartiya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is the article of Greg Kroah-Hartman, maintainer of the USB and other subsystems in the Linux kernel mentioning Canonical contribution to be 100 patches viz a viz 230 by Mandriva and only 270 by Gentoo. Remember

Re: [Ilugc] Canonical Not Great Contributor

2008-09-28 Thread Venkatesh Nandakumar
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 16:01, Aanjhan R [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 3:59 AM, Swapnil Bhartiya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is the article of Greg Kroah-Hartman, maintainer of the USB and other subsystems in the Linux kernel mentioning Canonical contribution to be 100

Re: [Ilugc] Canonical Not Great Contributor

2008-09-28 Thread Kapil Hari Paranjape
Hello, On Sun, 28 Sep 2008, Swapnil Bhartiya wrote: I just learnt from a friend of mine that I should stop using Ubuntu as Canonical is not contributing to the development of GNU/Linux systems as compared to other players. He also suggested that since most of its stuff, or nothing, is

Re: [Ilugc] Canonical Not Great Contributor

2008-09-28 Thread Kapil Hari Paranjape
Hello, On Sun, 28 Sep 2008, Kapil Hari Paranjape wrote: You can then re-examine your decision in the light of experience. By which I meant personal experience of course. Free software has one big freedom to offer (like science), that of making your _own_ choices. In the final analysis,

Re: [Ilugc] Canonical Not Great Contributor

2008-09-28 Thread Kenneth Gonsalves
On Sunday 28 Sep 2008 4:01:20 pm Aanjhan R wrote: On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 3:59 AM, Swapnil Bhartiya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is the article of Greg Kroah-Hartman, maintainer of the USB and other subsystems in the Linux kernel mentioning Canonical contribution to be 100 patches viz a

Re: [Ilugc] Canonical Not Great Contributor

2008-09-28 Thread Swapnil Bhartiya
I have a confession to make: I have shamelessly used linux since 1995 and have never contributed a patch to the kernel. Even worse, I dont know C. So, boycott me. Hate me. Kick me. Ban me. But whatever you do - I will continue to use linux. -- regards KG That was lovely KG ji.

[Ilugc] Canonical Not Great Contributor

2008-09-27 Thread Swapnil Bhartiya
I just learnt from a friend of mine that I should stop using Ubuntu as Canonical is not contributing to the development of GNU/Linux systems as compared to other players. He also suggested that since most of its stuff, or nothing, is upstream so we cant trust it. Also his argument was, being

Re: [Ilugc] Canonical Not Great Contributor

2008-09-27 Thread Venkatraman S
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 7:29 AM, Swapnil Bhartiya [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: I just learnt from a friend of mine that I should stop using Ubuntu as Canonical is not contributing to the development of GNU/Linux systems as compared to other players. He also suggested that since most of its stuff,

Re: [Ilugc] Canonical Not Great Contributor

2008-09-27 Thread Santhosh Thottingal
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Venkatraman S [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 7:29 AM, Swapnil Bhartiya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just learnt from a friend of mine that I should stop using Ubuntu as Canonical is not contributing to the development of GNU/Linux systems as