1 |
Mick wrote: |
2 |
> On Tuesday 10 February 2009, Joshua D Doll wrote: |
3 |
>> Saphirus Sage wrote: |
4 |
>>> Nikos Chantziaras wrote: |
5 |
>>>> http://video.linuxfoundation.org/video/1069 |
6 |
>>>> |
7 |
>>>> I found it quite interesting that even Gentoo beat Canonical in the |
8 |
>>>> amount of patches contributed upstream... |
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 |
>> This video brought up an interesting question by my friend (an ubuntu |
14 |
>> user). How would one go about getting Canonical or the ubuntu community |
15 |
>> to change their practice of not contributing fixes back upstream? |
16 |
>> Without having to change distributions. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> Gentoo involves you more with what goes bad under the bonnet and the average |
19 |
> Gentoo user is more interested in the workings of their OS to attempt |
20 |
> troubleshooting it and filing bugs. Your average Ubuntu user is less likely |
21 |
> to get their hands dirty, unless they are a dev. So, essentially we are |
22 |
> talking about different user profiles here. To answer your friend's |
23 |
> hypothetical question - he would either have to change your average Ubuntu's |
24 |
> user technical aptitude, or change the user. Either attempt may mean the end |
25 |
> of Ubuntu as we know it. |
26 |
|
27 |
The ubuntus are targeted at disgruntled windows users while gentoo is |
28 |
targeted at unix users. The former are used to complaining and getting |
29 |
no response while the later know it's their responsibility to help make |
30 |
it better... |
31 |
|
32 |
Have fun, |
33 |
Roy |