Re: Canonical's business model
Reinhard Tartler <siretart@gmail.com> writes:
> On 1/11/06, Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> 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 improve
>> > cooperation?
>>
>> Ubuntu could report in the BTS all the bugs it finds, and submit
>> patches via the BTS.
>
> What about bugs which are only applicable in ubuntu due to different
> depending packages? Do you really want to track all problems of a
> package in ubuntu within the debian bts? I assume not.
No. I want the Ubuntu maintainer to make a judgment about whether the
bug applies or not.
> For bugs applicable to both debian and ubuntu, I usually do file bugs
> are in the debian bts, as many other ubuntu users and developers also
> do. What do you expect more?
I want Ubuntu to promise to do so. That would constitute cooperation.
>> Ubuntu could find a way to do its own bug triage on packages for its
>> users, rather than leaving Debian maintainer fields unmodified.
>
> This is an old discussion with no real result. If the Maintainer field
> was changed, then ubuntu would be blamed for stealing credits from the
> original maintainer, something we don't want either.
Yeah, because the only way to document credit is in the Maintainer:
field. It's a shame there are no other files anywhere in the package
which could be modified. Heck, Ubuntu could even add a
"X-Debian-Maintainer:" field. But no, that isn't done.
Feh.
Reply to: