[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Is Ubuntu a debian derivative or is it a fork?

<quote who="Michael Banck" date="2005-06-08 11:56:17 +0000">
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 09:19:06AM -0700, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > The fact is that Ubuntu has proactively contributed a lot of code
> > back to Debian, much more than most Debian derivatives have.  I
> > see no reason why claims that Ubuntu is not doing _enough_, or
> > making it easy _enough_ for Debian to merge its work pales in
> > contrast to the fact that many other organizations have done, and
> > are doing, nothing whatsoever in this regard.
> This is of course true.  However, most of us know the Canonical
> dudes as close friends and great figures of Debian, so we might have
> expected a bit more from Ubuntu than from, say, Linspire, where (at
> least I) don't have any emotional connection with at all.

I think it's clear that there has been a lot more flowing back than
there is from Linspire.

Building a derived distribution on a tight timescale and doing it
while defining a new type of inter-distro relationship (or at least a
new scale) and figuring how what being a good community member means
while following through on all this is harder than any of us thought
and it's been hard to live up to our own ideals while balancing
everything. That said, I think Ubuntu has already done better than
anyone other derivation.

I have no desire to spin things in a way that makes everyone throw
their arms up and love Ubuntu but rather to find constructive ways
that these two projects (both of which I care about) can work together
in mutually beneficial ways. The projects mutual existence is a given
and doing it right is not easy.


Benjamin Mako Hill

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: