Re: Linux on the desktop - it's come a long way, but is it there yet?

["Jarod Wilson" <user=74@nabble.blu.org>]

 On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 18:00 -0400, Ruben Safir wrote: 
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 12:07:11PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: 
> > On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 11:05 -0400, Mark J. Dulcey wrote: 
> > > Jarod Wilson wrote: 
> > > > 
> > > > Ubuntu is unusual in other ways too. 
> > > > 
> > > > http://cycle-gap.blogspot.com/2008/07/linux-kernel-development-stats-from.html
> > > > 
> > > > Note the part towards the end where Greg KH mentions Canonical's 
> > > > contributions to the kernel. 
> > > 
> > > I'd have to see whether Canonical is contributing to other open-source 
> > > projects before reaching the conclusion that Greg reaches. It's possible 
> > > that they are more active in non-kernel projects. Kernel development 
> > > isn't the only way to participate in Linux. It's not really surprising 
> > > that a distribution where the major focus is UI polish and smoothness 
> > > would not be heavily focused on kernel work. 
> > > 
> > > It's also possible that they send their contributions upstream to Debian 
> > > rather than directly to the kernel developers, thus their work is 
> > > attributed to Debian developers rather than to Canonical. 
> > > 
> > > All that said, it's possible that Canonical really isn't being a good 
> > > community player. But I think that the jury is still out. 
> > 
> > Should have been clear that I was speaking solely from the kernel 
> > standpoint, I really have no clue what they do in other areas as far as 
> > upstream contributions. However, I do have insider knowledge[*] that 
> > they do NOT send kernel contributions upstream to Debian or anyone else. 
> > Canonical's "fixes" and "enhancements" are more or less considered 
> > "secret sauce" and a competitive advantage. 
> 
> That is a violation of the GPL