Headline FeedsLinuxInsider Talkback
|
|
See Full Story
The recently released Who Writes Linux kernel contributor list reveals that some of the usual supporters of Linux -- Red Hat, SUSE, IBM, Intel, Oracle -- remain firmly behind the open source OS. There has also been a lot of attention on the other contributors, which now include Microsoft. What I find most fascinating about the Linux contributor list -- beyond the increasing rate of code change with some 10,000 patches from 1,000 developers representing 200 companies in each quarterly kernel release -- are the contributors that show some new direction and potential for Linux, in this case the processor players.
Re: Reading Between the Linux Contributor List's Lines
Posted by: clockworkpc 2012-04-17 17:58:55 In reply to: Jay Lyman
In your article seem to equivocate on Canonical's responsibility to FOSS:
You state repeatedly that Canonical should contribute more resources to the kernel, in spite of the following:
"[...] I've always thought Ubuntu and Canonical have done quite a bit in expanding the ecosystem and market for Linux, which used to be practically unusable on the desktop. By aspiring to a better, easier and more polished UI, Ubuntu has lifted other Linux distributions and their UIs along with it, in my opinion."
Given that, why should Canonical contribute more to the kernel?
You state repeatedly that Canonical should contribute more resources to the kernel, in spite of the following:
"[...] I've always thought Ubuntu and Canonical have done quite a bit in expanding the ecosystem and market for Linux, which used to be practically unusable on the desktop. By aspiring to a better, easier and more polished UI, Ubuntu has lifted other Linux distributions and their UIs along with it, in my opinion."
Given that, why should Canonical contribute more to the kernel?
