| 1 |
On Tuesday 10 February 2009, Joshua D Doll wrote: |
| 2 |
> Saphirus Sage wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Nikos Chantziaras wrote: |
| 4 |
> >> http://video.linuxfoundation.org/video/1069 |
| 5 |
> >> |
| 6 |
> >> I found it quite interesting that even Gentoo beat Canonical in the |
| 7 |
> >> amount of patches contributed upstream... |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > Good find, I actually didn't know about E-Trade using Gentoo servers. I |
| 10 |
> > don't think it should be too surprising that Gentoo would contribute |
| 11 |
> > more patches than Conical, as until today, I'd only actually heard of |
| 12 |
> > one of them. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> This video brought up an interesting question by my friend (an ubuntu |
| 15 |
> user). How would one go about getting Canonical or the ubuntu community |
| 16 |
> to change their practice of not contributing fixes back upstream? |
| 17 |
> Without having to change distributions. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Gentoo involves you more with what goes bad under the bonnet and the average |
| 20 |
Gentoo user is more interested in the workings of their OS to attempt |
| 21 |
troubleshooting it and filing bugs. Your average Ubuntu user is less likely |
| 22 |
to get their hands dirty, unless they are a dev. So, essentially we are |
| 23 |
talking about different user profiles here. To answer your friend's |
| 24 |
hypothetical question - he would either have to change your average Ubuntu's |
| 25 |
user technical aptitude, or change the user. Either attempt may mean the end |
| 26 |
of Ubuntu as we know it. |
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Regards, |
| 29 |
Mick |
Archives