Shared publicly  - 
 
+Mark Shuttleworth, You write in the blog linked below:

"Mir is really important work. When lots of competitors attack a project on purely political grounds, you have to wonder what THEIR agenda is. At least we know now who belongs to the Open Source Tea Party "

As one of the people who has disagreed with the necessity of, the value proposition of as well as the practice of spreading lies in defense of Mir, I resent being equated with a political movement that bears no resemblance to the issues surrounding Mir. I am particularly offended by the implication that the only retort to Mir has been politically motivated.

It amounts to libel at worst, and name calling at best. You would not accept that done to you, yet you do it to others. Shame on you, Mark, shame.

You feel that defending Mir  with such tactics is important enough to plug that into an otherwise unrelated blog entry that opens with "I would like to say a few thank-you’s".

My response to that is simple, Mark: let's do this like adults.

If you wish to discuss Mir and cast aspersions on those who disagree in the process, well then by all means let's discuss Mir, Mark.

Let's do so live and online. Let's appear on one of the outstanding Free software video casts such as the Linux Action Show with +Chris Fisher and +Matt Hartley (assuming they will have us) and discuss the merits of Mir,  Wayland and their implications vis-à-vis Free software .

Yes, I am challenging you to a public debate on the matter. Seems appropriate as you seem to feel this is a political matter.

Are you in?
Before I launch into the tongue-twisting topic of t-series terminology I would like to say a few thank-you's. Saucy, now officially known as Ubuntu 13.10, is a wonderful achievement by a very large and diverse collection of teams and individuals. Each of us is motivated by something different ...
521
100
Marguerite Su's profile photoOliver Warner's profile photoCybe R. Wizard's profile photoManuel Galli's profile photo
294 comments
Tuomas Ahola
+
69
70
69
 
This all implies Mr. Shuttleworth actually listens to the Linux community. Which, by now, is pretty obvious, he doesn't.
 
Shuttleworth just crossed the line with this one.

I'm just waiting for the Internet to massacre him.
 
I'm interested in how this will turn out... :-)
 
It is very sad, that ubuntu is becoming more and more UNFREE (not beer of course) and and M.S. spreading FUD like the other MS.
 
+Aaron Seigo We're in. I think while it might sound daunting, the opportunity of stepping out from behind blog posts, or G+ posts, could improve the direction of the conversation. 
 
+Chris Fisher That's exactly my hope. Thanks for your support, I know I put you on the spot with this .. so thanks :)

+Dorian Trent While I may be harsh at times, I try to stay away from non-constructive behavior like calling people names and stick to discussing things on a factual basis. I'm open to being wrong in the course of that. That's all I expect from others.
 
+Aaron Seigo for not liking to call people names you sure did offend some tea party members. You kinda refuted your own point and gave way to the same rhetoric. Guess you're human too, kinda a bummer to find out you're not a qml script that somehow grew self awareness. If I was Mark I wouldn't waste my time with you as when the pot calls the kettle black it just seems to be a waste of words to retort. Maybe you should just calm down or put some of that passion back towards KDE.
Je Saist
+
1
4
5
4
 
As someone aligned with the Taxed Enough Already  Party, I feel slightly insulted that you would refer to us as "Intellectually Bankrupt"  

That being said, you aren't in the US, and probably any reports you read on the "TEA Party" are parsed by either the Associated Press or Reuters, organizations that are ideologically opposed to the TEA Party; and as a result are not inclined to do an accuracy check on any stories that involve people who are fighting back against government growth, government corruption, and government waste. Therefor, I have to conclude that any perceptions you have of the TEA Party are likely colored by propaganda designed to make you dislike the TEA Party from the start.

By the same token, I am HIGHLY  insulted that +Mark Shuttleworth would compare Canonical and Canonical aligned projects with the TEA Party. There is a huge  difference between a grassroots campaign to stop the rise of taxes and get elected officials into the US Government who are going to fight  the blatant corruption exemplified by Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Barack Obama; and... well... personal projects derived from corporate interests that barely adhere to the tenets of Open-Source Software, much less Free-Software (as defined by either the Debian Free Software Guidelines or the Free Software Foundation)   
 
sigh I know why I don't read the blog posts. Being personally attacked like that is really hurtful and I thought that shit stopped after I had to ask Kubuntu people to pass on that I'm not a scapegoat. Now the Ubuntu fanboys have more shit to throw at me. Thanks a lot +Mark Shuttleworth, it hasn't already been the worst year for me in free software thanks to what your company is doing. Yeah, it hurts being attacked over and over again for having an own opinion.
 
+Martin Gräßlin As you hurt Mr. Shuttleworth business, that's what he is interessed in, not freedom, it is no surprize, that you are attacked. I hope, that you know and feel, that your work is very high apreaciated by a lots and lots of people.
 
+Martin Gräßlin Let us be personal the other way around: you do an inspiring job on working on and reporting about KWin. Many times in the day I use software you wrote and it helps me getting stuff done. So could you just try to be a bit more happy about the appreciation by the people that actually use your work and care less about the people that are not interested in it anyways.
 
+Wolfgang Romey I'm not hurting Mr. Shuttleworth business. If he would not have written bullshit from the start like that KWin will work just fine on Mir while the design document says the opposite I would have never had to correct the wrong assumptions Canonical is spreading. If that's hurting Canoncial's business, I'm very sorry, but I'm not going to let lies about my software being standing there.

Also this would not allow for personal attacks (and I got those even from people who wrote books called "The art of community"). I have never attacked anybody privately in the Mir kettle. And even if Canonical thinks it's a good idea, it's rather short sighted, because they depend on the work of others. They are standing on the shoulders of giants. And one of the giants is KDE.
 
All this name-calling and politics distracts from what should be a technical decision. What are the pros and cons of mir compared with an implementation of Wayland? As I'm in a charitable mode, I doubt that Ubuntu struck off in a new direction out of a sense of NIH. 
 
+Ingolf Schäfer I can try :-) But it's difficult for me. I recognize personal attacks way more than the praise. Might be related to "nicht geschimpft, ist gelobt genug" and that I don't think my work needs to be praised. It's my god damn job to write the best window manager out there (and I as well are standing on the shoulders of giants called Matthias, Lubos, Fredrik, Thomas and many many more).
 
+Martin Gräßlin Of course, you don't intend to hurt his business. But I think he sees it that way. But if you are a defender of FREE software and not only open source software, as I think you are, there is no way to avoid it.
 
+Aaron Seigo I think you are being harsh with the TEA Party supporters. While I don't agree with the philosophy behind it, I think there's value in some of their ideas. If you ever listen to Ron and Rand Paul, you would see they know what they're talking about. These guys taught me there's merit behind the philosophy of the movement. 
 
Mir is a huge piece of overall ubuntu 13.10 releases (at least for phones). How can you call it unrelated to release-welcoming post? And arguments like "you promised to only say thanks in post's beginning, and now youre saying other things also" are really inadequate and not adult.

Overall, I'm also disappointed in no-real-reason fragmentation with Mir, but the way you react doesnt seem justified.
 
+Martin Gräßlin I would have just been a jerk and not said anything, then when it didn't work, say "I guess he was wrong, huh". Maybe they plan on forking Kwin as well, whatever. I guess it wouldn't be a community of people if there wasn't drama.
 
+Eduardo Medina "I doubt that Ubuntu struck off in a new direction out of a sense of NIH."

They started out with a misunderstanding of Wayland's technical capabilities (e.g. how to do client side buffers) and were not aware that work was nearly complete on input handling (which has now long since been complete and works a charm). So they started from some shaky starting points, all of which were documented on their wiki before they edited it after some of the Wayland devs pointed out their errors.

This is also coupled with statements from Mark S. saying that they wanted to be able to quickly develop and iterate without having to work with others in a way that would slow them down or make them compromise on integration features they wanted with Unity. I have issues with that position, and will address them in the debate if it happens.

Furthermore, it is under Canonical's usual "we can close the source code whenever we want" CLA, which has been a long standing policy of Canonical so as to have a certain amount of control over software they ship that is Free software.

It seems that it was a combination of the above that led to the decision to commit to Mir, and once they had done so publicly it seems to have become a matter of pride rather than pragmatics.
 
+Martin Gräßlin Regardless, you are respected and valued by many of us and we all deserve to know that. I also respect Marco, Sebas and many many others in the Plasma community for the work they do. That's one of the best things of working on Plasma: despite whatever crap may come up, we have the support of each other as well as the people who use our software every day.

:)

I do totally also understand how you feel about the attacks that go on, which are unprecedented coming from a company like Canonical who purports to be a member of the Free software community. This is why I am standing up and saying "let's get this on the table publicly once and for all".
 
+José Ricardo De León Solís "I think you are being harsh with the TEA Party supporters. "

What matters is that Mark used it as a purposeful insult with that sort of depiction of the Tea Party in mind. That intention is what bothers me.

" If you ever listen to Ron and Rand Paul, you would see they know what they're talking about"

I have; and imho neither (particularly Rand) knows much about the realities of humane governance. I'd be happy to discuss that elsewhere as politics is an interest of mine .. 

but elsewhere. I'd like to keep this focused on the issue of Mir.
 
Can't we all just get along? I mean, why are these attacks happening? Even before Mir got announced, the Ubuntu community was already feuding with several projects such as systemd and GNOME. With the Mir announcement, all hell broke loose and it's not mending. Mir could have been announced in a friendlier way without shooting Wayland in the foot. Remember how many times the Mir Ubuntu wiki page was edited to change the listing of flaws that Wayland has after several upstream Wayland developers voiced their concern? And then there's the whole thing with the major desktops cozying up to Wayland instead of Mir and how Shuttleworth responded in a less than friendly way.

A friend of mine says that all this is a PR maneuver by Shuttleworth in order to fan the flames away from Ubuntu and to gain more attentive ears. I don't know, it all seems pointless and harsh to me. I understand why many upstream devs refuse to support Mir since it's a one distro solution, but what I can't understand is why isn't the discussion civil? If this isn't a PR stunt, then I don't know what this is.
 
I as a kubuntu user would really love to see Mark and Aaron on Linux action show,even though i'm not a big fan of that show ;). Btw +Aaron Seigo will there be any new episode of "The Luminosity of Free Software"?
 
+Konstantine Rybnikov "Mir is a huge piece of overall ubuntu 13.10 releases (at least for phones). How can you call it unrelated to release-welcoming post?"

Covering Mir would make sense. Defending Mir against naysayers in the way he did was out of context. He went from writing about the Ubuntu 13.10 release to misrepresenting people who think their decision to pursue Mir was not the right one.

He took a positive article about Ubuntu and Canonical and injected negativity about people outside of it.

"And arguments like "you promised to only say thanks in post's beginning, and now youre saying other things also" are really inadequate and not adult"

You are putting words in my mouth, and I would appreciate it if you would not do so in future. I never wrote "you promised to only say thanks", nor did I imply that.

The reason I noted that Mark started out with "I want to say thanks" is that it stands in stark contrast to what would follow in the blog post. It demonstrates that for whatever reason, even though he intended say something positive he felt compelled to start slinging mud. I do think that says something of the character of the man, and that character is causing harm. See Martin's comments above to understand how. He is not the only one, just one of the only ones willing to stand up and share his feelings honestly.
 
+Jeremiah Summers If I understand you correctly, you are suggesting that I have trespassed Mark in some way? If so, could you please explain what that way is?

If I have misunderstood you, please help me understand what you actually meant.

+Ján Dráb I haven't been doing Luminosity since I was using G+ hangouts to do them ... and currently the plugin crashes on my system. I would like to pick them up again, but I need to sort that technical problem out, and I've been unfortunately too busy to track it down. :/ But yes, I do plan on getting them back again..
 
+Aaron Seigo No Aaron I am saying your reference to the Tea Party and bringing any political party back into the conversation was just as immature (if not more) then what Mark did. You could have simply just said I don't like the fact he brought a political party into it. Instead you fell (I thought of you much higher, now I do not) to his depth and really just proved that a majority of opensource projects all have their weaknesses and that is people with an agenda, whether that's your's or his at this point I could care less you both are an insult to the community. No matter to what lengths you have contributed your character is what truly counts and at this point it stinks. I have always been biased against Shuttleworth and his agenda, now I have to second guess yours. I would expect this out of Mark but not you, you really let me down.
 
+Eduardo Medina oops.. sorry, took the wrong autocomplete option and didn't double check ... my bad!
 
+Aaron Seigo thanks for clarifying your position. Now it would be great to hear a similar statement from the people behind mir. 
 
+Jeremiah Summers I will freely admit that I can't change how you feel about that. I do think it is quite odd that you would judge my technical capacity based on my political viewpoints. I routinely work with people who hold viewpoints on politics, religion and other 'sensitive' topics that are far afield from my own. I respect our differences, and while I will engage in discussion about them where the opportunity presents itself, it is completely separate from how I judge their capacity in, e.g., software development.

I would also suggest that you gain little knoweldge about my character simply from knowing my viewpoint on the Tea Party. :)

As I mentioned to the other person in this thread, I am happy to discuss this matter elsewhere with you if you are interested.

In any case, I really don't want this to become a distraction, so I'll edit the original posting to allow us to focus on what matters here.
 
+Aaron Seigo  > he intended say something positive he felt compelled to start slinging mud

I completely agree and support you at this point. It wasn't polite at all, and it shouldn't been said like that.
 
+Aaron Seigo  No it has nothing to do with political view points but rather your hypocrisy in pointing out someone using them and insulting you.. while you go insulting those in the (whatever) party at the same time. Did you not notice you even did that? I am gaining knowledge about your character.. right now and it's not good. We've worked together before.. that's how I can say I really wouldn't expect this out of you, and am let down by it. Of course like everyone else in the world your a victim here and can't apologize for being a hypocrite because it's your personal view and your unapologetic..prideful just like Mark is? You're two peas in a pod.
 
Ladies and gentleman, we present yet another pointless Open Source bickering match.

I have a better suggestion than a debate that simply entrenches people further - how about everyone stops biting at each other's ankles about their respective projects. Don't like upstart? Fine don't use it. Don't like systemd? Fine don't use it.

Let's act like adults, not kids bickering over who farted louder than anyone else.
 
+Jono Bacon That's great and all, but that attitude fails to resolve who is * right * on the internets. 
 
+Martin Gräßlin don't feel down-trodden, many, many of us respect your work.

This is one of the reasons I try to never talk smack about other people's projects - we all take our projects seriously. I might not use your software, but I have tremendous respect for the devotion and commitment you have to creating and sharing it with others.

As I said earlier, I think we all just need a "live and let live" attitude - this in-fighting does nothing but slow Free Software down.
 
+Tuomas Ahola I was under the impression everyone is right on the Internet just like there's no one who is guilty in jail :)
 
+Jono Bacon That doesn't work and you know it.
+Tuomas Ahola There is no right or wrong, there is just choice. As +Jono Bacon wrote, you don't like A so chose B and if you don't want B eventually go with C etc.

Linux is about Choice and honestly, right now, I am pretty unimpressed with all desktop environments, and also with all SysV init replacement.
Just because, whatever I have to use, it's totally wrong. 

The only solution for this mess is: GNUStep with WindowMaker and SysV Init Style. ;)
 
+Jono Bacon If you really believe in what you're saying, then you should acknowledge that this kind of blog post is part of the problem. I don't see any way in which you can defend the gratuitous Tea Party comparison.
 
+Marcelo Hashimoto "I don't see any way in which you can defend the gratuitous Tea Party comparison" there's one way.. ignore it and go on about what you're doing. Slinging mud back doesn't do anything. He who slings mud, not only gets his own hands dirty, but looses ground.
 
+Jono Bacon The problem is that you always bring this "why can't we all get along" speech after replies to Mark have been made. I don't recall you ever bringing it directly to Mark himself, at least not publicly.

A Canonical employee publicly not approving this kind of attitude from him would go a long way in stopping him from keeping this annoying, destructive habit. Please consider writing a blog post about it.

+Jeremiah Summers I understand your point, but technically that's not defending.
 
+Marcelo Hashimoto I have raised this issue of how people get on with each other many times outside of incidents involving Mark.

I have raised concerns with people's conduct internally, including Mark.

To be clear: I don' think anyone throwing barbs at other projects and calling names should do this, Mark included.
 
+Jono Bacon My point is that "internally" is clearly not being enough. It's getting worse with each blog post, frankly.
 
Even though I'm usually a strong critic of Ubuntu and Shuttleworth in particular, on this occasion I can't help but wonder what all the fuss is about.

I read the offending blog entry, which is nothing more sinister than a perfectly benign "thank you" post, containing one small quip about Mir's detractors, comparing them to "Tea Party" members (marked with a smiley).

Now, as much as I despise libertarianism, and would myself feel insulted at being described as such, I'd hardly characterise it as "libel". Apart from anything else, in order for a statement to be libellous, it has to name the party to whom the statement applies, and no specific name was given or even implied. One might choose to infer that one is the party being referred to, but that's purely speculative.

I'd also question the idea that being associated with something that's perfectly legal (albeit antithetical to my principles) could even be construed as libellous in the first place. If I characterise a remark as ideologically "capitalist" or "socialist", would that be libellous, especially when parallels can in fact be drawn between that remark and a political ideology? And if you dispute that such parallels apply, then surely that's just a difference of opinion, not "libel".

Whatever. It just seems like an awful fuss over a tongue-in-cheek comment.

As for Mir, I'll reserve judgement until I've actually tried it, although to be honest I don't really see what's wrong with X11. Ironically Shuttleworth draws a similar conclusion about systemd, describing it as "hugely invasive and hardly justified", and I wholeheartedly agree with him, but I can't help but notice the hypocrisy of his statement, given his defence of Mir.

To me it seems that two opposing sides are engaging in "NIH" (as Shuttleworth puts it), then throwing rocks at each other, and neither side is behaving very professionally, or frankly even like adults.

But "libel"? No.

Personally I'd be overjoyed if both sides stopped trying to reinvent things that already work perfectly well, and instead concentrated on fixing those things that don't.
 
+Marcelo Hashimoto I am not going to publicly slam people who I work with - that is unprofessional. I wouldn't do that with anyone. Those kinds of issues are best raised privately.
 
+Jono Bacon Who said anything about "slamming"? There's a big, huge gap between expressing a constructive opinion of disapproval and "slamming".

Blanket, vague statements about the community as a whole are not exactly an ideal alternative. And not exactly less unprofessional.
 
+Jono Bacon  represents the public face of Ubuntu, not the actions of a single person (even someone like Mark). He's not Mark's mommy, it's a simple matter of commonsense.

Last I checked, Jono lacks any sort of USB connection into the thoughts and actions of any individuals outside of himself. (Not suggesting that Jono is wired for USB, that's not too likely and might be a little strange) ;)

As for a debate, I think a calm discussion would be a good idea to allow everyone to express merits and concerns alike -- maybe even include some Q&A, but hopefully keep it constructive.

Chris has stated that he's interested in a discussion between both gentlemen on the show.

Disclaimer: This doesn't reflect my position on any aspect of this topic, rather stating as a matter of fact that Jono isn't Mark's keeper.  My perspective, the mileage of others on my views may vary.

Edited for flow, etc
 
+Matt Hartley You missed my point. Jono's not the community's mommy either.  But he does not hesitate in going into full Kumbaya mode against it when something like this happens. I'm not asking for a specific position, I'm asking for consistency. Either call out Mark too, or stay quiet about the replies too.
 
+Marcelo Hashimoto Bite me, I will state my feelings anytime I wish. Don't like it, can't help ya there.

If I choose to call someone out, I will do so on the media platform of my choice.

Quote me on that if you like, I honestly don't give a rip.
 
+Marcelo Hashimoto Well then my apologies. If this was the case, then I was out of line.

I misunderstood: "I'm not asking for a specific position, I'm asking for consistency. Either call out Mark too, or stay quiet about the replies too."  Didn't see anyone specifically referenced at first pass. Might suggest adding + in the future, just to make sure boneheads like me don't misinterpret.
 
+Matt Hartley I do that kind of mistake all the time. It's the damn internetz and its tone-confusing nature. This kind of conversation would be much better and less ambiguous in person, preferably over a beer.
 
+Jono Bacon "Let's act like adults, not kids bickering over who farted louder than anyone else." - well, it's to late. Mark already has thrown the punch towards the community, again...
It's normal for a human being to respond to an attack...
 
+Marcelo Hashimoto I think I am consistent. I have consistently encouraged people to be respectful over the years, both inside and outside the communities I am involved in.

As +Matt Hartley says, I am not Mark's keeper. I am not responsible for his actions - he is responsible for his own actions, and when I feel his actions have been out of line I have consistently had a conversation with him. But those conversations are private...not a public flogging. I am not going to make someone a public example when I feel they step out of line, irrespective of who they are. In the same way, if I felt you were being out of line I would speak to you privately too. I just think that is the most professional way to handle these situations.

As for me going "full kumbaya mode", I am simply expressing views based on my care for the wider Open Source community. I genuinely worry that we spend too much time bickering and arguing over different ideas and perspectives, and much of this is anti-social and rude and frankly, is just a huge distraction from us all making our projects better.

I have always been supportive of full and frank debate, but name-calling and personalized emotive rudeness is unacceptable irrespective of who you are, who you work for, and where you fit in the food chain.
 
+Jono Bacon I think you are interpreting my suggestions as something much harsher than they actually are. It's not "flogging" at all. I don't see anything wrong with naming names sometimes to avoid alienation.

You did that with RMS not a long time ago. (the spyware episode) I didn't fully agree with you, but I didn't feel it was disrespectful to RMS, nor any kind of "flogging". That's the kind of public criticism I'm talking about.
 
+Jono Bacon : "I have always been supportive of full and frank debate, but name-calling and personalized emotive rudeness is unacceptable irrespective of who you are, who you work for, and where you fit in the food chain."

Except when it's "the views of the peanut gallery", of course.
 
I think a clarifying discussion could be a way forward. Making small skirmishes at each other from time to time is not. A talk is probably the only way to end it. As it involves pretty much the whole Linux community it should be done publicly. Canonical have lost a good amount of trust during this debacle.. For that to have an even slightly chance of being restored it has to be don publicly.

Else the divide between Ubuntu and the Linux community will just grow bigger. People have genuine fears and concerns about the path Ubuntu is on. People invest their lifes in Linux. They don't want to see all that go to waste. Ubuntu is important for the Linux community. I hope that can continue to be the case.
 
Are you sure OP's name is just Aaron Seigo? without an "aka Soldier" something? This statement reminds me Chairman Mao "Hey America! Here's my 30 millions' casualties, put yours on table, and let's nuclear gambling!". This behavior itself is so man! I'm gonna love this! M.S., put yours on table! Face to face fight! Like boxers! Be a man! Aaron I back ya! 
uo ou
+
9
10
9
 
+Jono Bacon well-reasoned critique from a position of knowledge is not 'bickering'. You are doing the same thing Mr. Shuttleworth does in the linked blog post; pretending that the lowest form of the opposition to Mir represents the whole field.

Rather than, of course, actually responding to the substance of (reasoned) criticism, as Mr. Seigo is inviting Mr. Shuttleworth to do.

Do you believe Mir is above criticism, being so perfect  that it could not possibly benefit from the critical insights of knowledgeable members of our community? Or is Canonical afraid/unable to actually engage in a dialogue of substance with an eloquent, knowledgeable detractor?

Mr. Seigo has, despite your and Mr. Shuttleworth's childish provocations, conducted himself like a gentleman and, to my mind, deserves a respectful response rather than further false characterisation of his position and name-calling (which reeks of the sort of response one would expect from a party who doesn't have an actual argument).
 
Shuttleworth gave objectives to hold Mir to, such as superior battery life. Nothing will stop Mir so I guess we will see. If Wayland can't deliver the same then Mir is justified as far as its contributors are concerned. That's how it will be defended, and that's a technical, objective defence.

 
Not like Mark could ever debate about the technical merits of Mir, I doubt he's got any technical understanding concerning this false accusation of Wayland being incapable of supporting their requirement vs Mir's ability and reason to segregate vendors and their proprietary driver support.
Personally... I am against Mir, but one possible way to sort this out so Cononical doesn't kill themselves and we can all get along would be to have Mir be a Wayland compositor... then Mir wouldn't be such a massive problem that it's creating.
 
Serious. I don't know what is worse. The Mark comments or the butthurt attack after that.

Come on! We live in a world that the "great leader" (Linus Tovalds) says things like "Fuck You Nvidia", "Come to the dark side, Sarah. We have cookies" and you +Aaron Seigo, are offended because of the "Tea Party"?
 
I want to see this debate, but I am not sure it is a fair one. To my understanding +Aaron Seigo understands the code @ a very deep compile time level. +Mark Shuttleworth understands his code from second hand reports, given to him by others. I believe that a debate like this has been publically needed for a long time, but wouldn't the leader in charge of mir development be a better candidate to debate the need for mir?

Mark is a spokesman most of all in my sometimes humble opinion. These are just my two cents.

I am honestly a terrible programmer, but I do advocate for free/open-source software. I have several clients: One adores Ubuntu 12.04 for it's psychedelic color scheme, One loves KDE on OpenSUSE as it reminds her of amiga, and one loves xfce on Ubuntu Studio mainly because it works with his sound-gear. I would like to state for the record that I reserve the right to be wrong @ all times, and even welcome the opportunity. 
 
First, for those who are suggesting I should grow a thicker skin on this one, you have to understand that this is not about me personally.

It is about the hacker like Martin and Marco who get downtrodden by this kind of trolling.

It is about the example set by two-faced weaseling where one person in the company trolls and the other tells others not to because that's bad.

It's about every community member who mimics that behaviour and spreads the lies about good Free software projects.

This all hurts Free software, and until it stops I will not.

Johnny Cash - Man in black with lyrics
 
+Kevin Lausen I'm fully confident Mark can show up with his talking points and we can discuss things in an adult manner. He is also the main decision maker in these things and feels the need to keep talking about it publicly. Several members of the press hang on his every  pronouncement as if it was coming from someone with deep technical understanding, which compounds the problem. If he wasn't that involved and that public, I'd happily give him a pass. He is, so I don't.
 
+Aaron Seigo
If in the first time when Canonical announced the production of the MIR, the wayland developers and Mir developers had made ​​a "meeting" to resolve differences and aligned interests between the MIR and wayland. Maybe today the MIR could be just an implementation of wayland.

But no. All involved preferred the war.

The reaction of the Mir annunciation simply been greatly exaggerated.


We don't need a debate. We need that the "community " stop to fight and talk.

Adults talks, politicians do debates.
Aaron Seigo
+
19
20
19
 
+Jono Bacon You are not Mark. I fully respect that. Which is why I did not ask for a debate with you or with Canonical or with Ubuntu (whatever that might mean ..).

Mark opened his mouth and has once again set a terrible example for everyone around him. Mark is largely responsible for setting the attitude and opinions found within the Ubuntu community, and as such bears a responsibility:when he creates schisms and promulgates lies, they become visible across the entire faultline along the Ubuntu user community within the larger Free software community.

Mark does not occupy a privileged position which makes it OK for him to speak his mind, particularly in this fashion, such that is not OK for others to respond in an adult fashion as I have here. You can't quiet a valid response to a statement made in public without hypocritically aligning with that statement.

I will not pretend Mark did not say what he did, nor will I allow his false statements go unchallenged in front of the community he is trying to convince.

As such, this is between Mark and those he addressed. I do not recognize you as a valid intermediary. Mark spoke for himself, and so am I.

Go home, Jono, you are neither wanted nor needed here.
 
+Jono Bacon you are a community manager, right? Wouldn't it be your job to protect me from the insults and personal attacks I got from members of your community? I was really shocked when I read from you personally that I'm only against Mir because it's from Canonical. From all the persons you should know better to not do that, right? Where was there the deescalation one would expect from a community manager? Where was there the respect you say you have?

Sorry but after that I don't take any of your comments serious. It looks to  me now like it's totally fine that Mark insults us and that you come and tell us to not fell - what was the word - "down-trodden" by that. It's telling the victim to not feel offended. Why is the blog post from Mark still there? Why is the blog post still there where he claims that KWin will work fine on Mir? Wouldn't it be a better job to tell the members of your community to send a public sorry and remove those offensive parts than to tell me to not feel offended?
 
+Márcio Carneiro "the wayland developers and Mir developers had made ​​a "meeting" to resolve differences and aligned interests between the MIR and wayland. "

They talked on irc and various other places, yes. I know because I followed those conversations. There was no alignment of interests, however. There was correction of mistaken ideas the Mir team was carrying about Wayland, though the Mir team has continued to carry some in spite of that.

But I have no idea where you got the idea that the developers came to some mutual understanding. Can you provide citations?

"All involved preferred the war."

No, actually, all involved did not.

I said many times that Canonical should get on with making Mir awesome (exact words I used) and we should leave it alone.

The Wayland devs also just moved on.

The provocations have come from those involved with Mir and Canonical. Should they simply go unanswered, to be parotted endlessly as fact and truth by others?

"We don't need a debate. We need that the "community " stop to fight and talk."

I'd love to talk. I have engaged with people quite a bit on this issue as the topic has come up and I have striven to remain both civil and focused on the facts.

I hope you agree that to engage in civil discourse, it requires more than just me to be civil and engaged in discourse, it takes us all.

And while I have found that among many Ubuntu users and other community members, Mark is evidently more interested in libeling people and spreading falsehoods, as seen in this blog entry. I've even seen him tell people here on G+ to "shut the fuck up". Civil discourse, indeed.

I am happy to talk with Mark in a civil manner, and I plan to do so in our meeting should he take the invite. But I'm not going to be the meek sheep run over by the bulldozer. If Mark wishes to take the tone he is, I will do my best to create incentive for him to rethink his methods.
 
+Aaron Seigo I believe you would would embarrass +Mark Shuttleworth technically. I don't want this to come off as an insult to mark, as The math/programming skill of his that founded verisign, and made enough money for him to take a step back, and become more of an entrepreneur/spokesman and less of a programmer. 

Also wouldn't you want the chance to debate the mir project with mir developers who are hiding behind their big brothers Mark and Jono? 

Just my thought's as an end user, who tries to help people solve problems with both KDE & Ubuntu. 

At the end of the day I want to thank both of you, because I wouldn't have the very few dollars, that I have been clinging to desperately without both of you!

BTW: I'm still saving up 4 a vivaldi +Aaron Seigo :^D
 
+Martin Gräßlin I 100% agree.

By publicly defending and engaging in the same sorts of behavior himself, Jono's personal credibility on the matter is non-existent.
 
+Kevin Lausen I would not use whatever technical knowledge advantage I may possess unfairly in the discussion. e.g. I would not pose questions there is no possibility of him being able to retort to because they are phrased in too technical a fashion. I would keep the discussion sufficiently high-level so that we may all engage usefully.

That said, I am not interested on taking the Mir developers to task because they were not the ones who wrote that blog entry. Mark wrote it, he should answer.

If Mark wishes to say such things and put himself on the pedestal of "benevolent dictator for life" of one of the larger user communities in Free software, then he will be held accountable for what he says. Put another way, if Mark does not wish to be held accountable for what he says, he should not say it and/or adopt a different role.

Keep in mind that Mark routinely preaches "everyone be good to one another" but as can be seen in this blog entry he doesn't follow his own words. His action does damage to the Free software community, and many in the Ubuntu community emulate his behavior.
 
+Martin Gräßlin well a statement like "kwin" will support Y is also not very accurate as well?!

Maybe something like "as long as I am the maintainer I will not work on mir support" or "as long as Iam the maintainer I will veto mir support" would be more accurate?

There have been maintainers of kwin before you and there will be most certainly maintainers after you.
 
+Aaron Seigo  feel the same way. I feel that some people that may have been raised to be complete gentlemen, and always act like it in real life, on the Internet seem to forget all the rules of fair-play/manners. I think that +Mark Shuttleworth  believes free-software is the best way to build a business, while you believe the best way to build software is to build free-software that people are going to use. I believe both are valid points, that the closed-source developed world need to understand! Let's remember our competition is Apple. 

As an underprivileged American who had to worry about whether he was going to be able to feed himself because of the actions of tea-party members in a Government I am Ashamed of mark for comparing the hard work of the KDE project to the publicity junkies of the tea-party. From that perspective mark is the one using the media to his advantage to further an agenda. I believe politics are to protect rich folks like Mark, and not fairly intelligent poor people like myself. Guess I owe the Internet a few more pennies, than my two cents. Guess I better get a real job, instead of teaching people free software...Only problem is I can't as my Government has labeled me a criminal and America is my prison island...:/
 
+Holger Freyther well I never said that. Let me quote myself from my very first blog post about Mir: "Will KWin support Mir? No! Mir is currently a one distribution only solution and any adjustments would be distro specific. We do not accept patches to support one downstream. If there are downstream specific patches they should be applied downstream. This means at the current time there is no way to add support and even if someone would implement support for KWin on Ubuntu I would veto the patches as we don’t accept distro-specific code. If Mir becomes available on more distributions one can consider the second question. Given the extreme success of Unity on non-Ubuntu distributions I’m positively optimistic that we will never have to do the evaluation of the second question."
 
+Martin Gräßlin Kwin is the best composited window manager. It's everything I wish compiz would become someday...stable! I showed off the kwin cube to someone who begged me to install it on their computer. It blew their mind on a computer, that barely runs Ubuntu/Unity(compiz)
 
+Chris Fisher +Aaron Seigo i seriously doubt it'd ever happen, but if it were to, i suggest you involve more relevant devs like from gtk & gnome land, maybe enlightenment efl land (as these are the biggest names porting to wayland as of today)... and probably tag on +Kristian Høgsberg ... how could you have such a debate without him? :)
 
+Carsten Haitzler I'd love to see some round-table discussion about it as well. I don't think this would be the best context for it, however, as it would easily become 10 people who get 30s each to not fully convey a full thought. I'd also like to give Mark an fair and equal opportunity to speak his part.

It would be cool to do such a round-table, however, separate from this. I think the user and app developer community could both benefit a lot from it and it would probably be a quite enjoyable for the participants.

Regarding porting to Wayland, the Plasma team is also doing this work and has been demo'ing increasing levels of Wayland support over the last year.

p.s. for those who don't know Carsten by name, he's the fellow who founded Enlightenement, aka rasterman.
 
+Kevin Lausen First, sorry to hear about your struggles in your home country .. aside from all else in this thread, those sort of issues are even more important.

So ..

"while you believe the best way to build software is to build free-software that people are going to use"

That's certainly part of it; another part of it is that I believe free and open societies require free and open technology, so that the means of communication and learning do not become withheld from anyone and remain open to everyone on equitable terms.

As for the dichotomy between "Mark the business guy" and "Aaron the tech guy", while I certainly bow to Mark's experience in business ... over the last couple years my company has invested significantly (6 figures) in bringing Plasma Active and Bodega to fruition. (Others are investing in it too, I'm thankfully not alone there.) So I do have business interests in Free software as well.

I appreciate that people may not see that as a defining characteristic, because that means I have successfully retained Free software as a priority. Many other Free software companies are run similarly, where the priority is on the ethics and technology such that when business goals come into tension with those of Free software, Free software wins.
 
+Aaron Seigo Also very good points, and also very good parts of why I don't support closed bureaucratic communications platforms like Apple or M$. The media is what so polarized America, because they were allowed to operate w/o transparency. hiding behind armies of lawyers that step on hard working people, who deserve a chance to survive. Probably part of why Marks legal/media-agency speak drives us both a touch mad. This is me still reserving the right, to be wrong.
 
How does Canonical plan to run Qt, or GTK atop Mir as MS alleges in his blog? Is this via XMir or are they porting the toolkits to Mir?
 
+Je Saist i find hard to believe that people who go so blatantly against special interests (obamacare) can be corrupted. by who excactly?
 
+Aaron Seigo I'm not a "tech" guy, I'm a regular user and when i read this type of comments make wonder way people continue to "argue" about this... If Linux ecosistem is about choice way are you guys losing time discussing this tipe of things? Mir, Wayland, X11 for the final user, if it works is the same. What the final user wants is better software, more and more specific software, like Pro Cads, ERPS, solid and secure interactions with other OS.
If we stop a little the "arguing", and start to think more How to cooperate more, maybe, maybe the Wayland/MIR, or Canonical vs the rest of the FOSS became a non subject. I appreciate all the efforts from everyone one the DEVs that work to make Linux a wonderfull product, but I don't really appreciat the "lost of time" arguing about something that don't going to make Linux better.
If Linux join efforts like all, to bringing more people to it, then some specific software productors may become "obligated" to port their software to "the house". Sorry is not on topic, but is my humble opinion about subjects that fragment the Linux Train...
 
Honestly, irrespective of the bickering, a proper debate would be a very good thing for the community. My interest in Wayland is mainly because there seems to be more global interest than Mir, but there is a lot of biased information around, by people who have no idea what they are talking about. In fact, most people discussing Wayland vs Mir generally have very little input (if any) into the two projects (and in some cases, NO project). As of yet, I haven't seen any discussions by anyone who has input in both projects.

My only recommendation, is that its a live debate between a small group from the two teams, instead of only two developers. Both these projects are so large, and people have such different specialist skills that a debate between 2 people may not be the most informative. It could very well be that Jono Bacon or Shuttleworth can provide a convincing argument to switch to Mir (or, vice versa).

It would also be useful to sort out some political arguments (for instance, Intel might have stopped supporting Mir, because Canonical may have wanted to charge them money, or made other silly demands, and a live debate would help ensure that such topics were properly discussed). Without this, in all honesty, it would be difficult for developers to make an informative decision regarding the proper project to support
 
+miguel pires I agree. Doesn't really matter who started the discussion on Mir.

From my point of view it's about as useful as discussing whether there really should be a KDE Desktop given that we already have a GNOME. (Random example for a kind of comparison of how this feels to me.)
 
+miguel pires If the community is divided into two, developer resources are halved (and both projects may suffer). Not only would both Mir and Wayland suffer though, but every windowing project and driver would need significantly more testing and code.

We need a discussion, so developers focus on the best option. Desktop environments are a different discussion altogether (in reality, if they all used the same backend, but had their own frontend's, it would be a lot more efficient than the way it is now). 

Linux is about diversity, but, having two options for some projects (like the Linux kernel for instance), would actually be a nightmare for the community. In this case, if both Mir and Wayland serve the exact same purpose, but in two separate ways (one in a clearly inferior manner), it is actually far better for the community to let one fail (of course, politics is important here, because we don't want another Xfree86 disaster on our hands) 
 
+Jono Bacon "I have a better suggestion than a debate that simply entrenches people further - how about everyone stops biting at each other's ankles about their respective projects."

Someone hits some bystanders and when one bystander takes up the gloves, the friend of the one who gave the first blow is standing up saying 'let's not fight, someone might gets hurt'.
All nice, but the first hit is a fact and can't be undone.
Do you recognize the situation once you fill in the names? It is not the first time this happened.

So Jono, maybe you should shake the ropes you're attached with and tell the puppet master he should get the associativity rules about Linux and Ubuntu straight again.
Linux is not Ubuntu, no matter how many wet dreams Mark has about this.
 
+Andrew Luecke While this holds some truth to it I wonder who is the one that would decide which projects are 'allowed' to duplicate efforts and which ones aren't. Clearly most of the people think Mir is something that shouldn't exist given that someone wanted to create Wayland. Truth is Wayland hasn't moved an inch until the 'threat' of Mir came around. Would it have been better to wait on Wayland forever by taking Mir out of the picture?
 
+Harald Glatt While you think he is replying, many people really think he is trolling. Ignoring the fact that he is among the top contributors to the discussion that you find useless.
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner Well in that case: Don't feed the trolls :)

Mark is in a constant position of justifying himself in this discussion which means that he keeps getting attacked. That doesn't mean he is participating in the discussion, he is merely trying to set the record straight.
 
+Harald Glatt Given how even you are misinformed about the development state of Wayland before and after the announcement of Mir, it is unfortunately very necessary to constantly address the trolls.
 
+Márcio Carneiro You realize that Linus Torvalds' words were said as a joke? There is one thing to insult someone and another to joke about a problem...
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner normally I don't read the blog of Mark. I read and interact in the forums of many comunitis, because for me is more important to learn and help then to discusse something that not going to be usefull.
+Andrew Luecke if I understand correctly, Wayland is used by everyone, MIR is used by Canonical! So at this point we don't have a division, we have a Company that decided that is better to them use a diferent thing. So whats the problem? Sorry like I've sayed I'm not a Tech guy I'm a end user, and for me this is no problem. I think in the end of this, we going to see if project A or B going to live or not. If Mark have sayed things are not true aabout wayland or the wayland people have sayed things are not true about MIR that is something they have to solve in private or in Court. The thing going to died when the final products are presented to the end user, and the end user is going to make is choice, because, if product A are instable, the end user don't going to use it. Sorry I'm very pragmatic about this stuffs, more important to me, is the ecossystem try to create the conditions for porting software more easy, for the people have the habillity to swicht fromthe OS they use to Linux with more "Confidence"...
 
Let's do this like adults...and code to prove you are right. Please don't waste your time in further valueless discussions. The great feature of Mir is that since its existence it boosts development in both Mir and Wayland. All these people and companies who do not like Mir put a lot of energy in making Wayland a success. Please keep putting this energy in improving Wayland instead of in some valueless discussions. Put your ego aside and code.
 
I don't understand why all this posturing and handwaving is neccessary.

If Mir is thecnically justified, community will see this and it will thrive.
If it is piece of crap or cheap copy hiding behind political motives, likewise.

I suspect that the truth lies in later, but don't feel the need to go on assaoult over this. Time will  tell, and not much of it is needed, so chill out folks...
 
+Harald Glatt Not saying projects should be put on the cutting block, but we should be encouraging projects to consolidate resources, not diversify them (some projects I've seen which were forked effectively killed both projects by halving the resources). In some cases (like Xfree86), the results were well worth it, but in cases like this, I doubt it will be.  This debate seems like a good way to sway people and developers, into making the right choice, and a good way for developers of the team to discuss the benefits/disadvantages of their method.

Another good example is APT/RPM for instance. Having two packaging systems hasn't been beneficial to the community at all (and has been a massive drain, since tools, etc are all doubled). As a community, we should be encouraging the teams to work together, and unify the standard. Both could still create their own tool, but, having a common format would at least help reduce community overheads. In this case, both methods of approaching the problem are different, and there can only be one right way. I wonder if the programmers themselves from both teams have ACTUALLY had a proper debate about whether their way is right, or, if they are both simply buried so deep that neither care any longer about whether one way has a technical advantage. 
 
+Aaron Seigo Stop acting like a child and do you work. This is ridiculus coming from someone like you. Shame on you, Aaron, shame. 
 
+Aaron Seigo, +Martin Gräßlin, KDE wins the biggest political turmoil prise, still -- "Will support Windows, won't support Mir".  That is what motivates Shuttleworth's perception of being victimised.  If you didn't see that in his blog post -- you definitely lack empathy.
 
+Aaron Seigo I feel that you are disappointed by +Mark Shuttleworth 's comments. But you should go ahead  with your valuable work, coz the truth is that +Mark Shuttleworth had experienced and love Mir and you likewise for Wayland. These different passions might count for live debate, but when the Open Source spirit is calling, it s stupid. let the code proves, Mir is not in production use, so is Wayland. why challenge now? +Aaron Seigo Even things break and someone has to part.

Remeber the idea to be planted on the Robert Fischer. In the Open Source World, things need to be falling down, ridicules to be heaped, choices multiplied. but in the end Open Source works very well, coz there are many things/idea to do the same thing in different ways, if possible novel. Remember X server, SysV init, they are irrevelant nowadays but they are venerable because their codes are open. :)
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner The problem is that you're pointing this out, just like me, without giving any source or really anything to back your claim. However unlike me you qualify your statement in a way that aims to make it come across as the clearly better informed, while in reality you have added absolutely no value over what I said.

This whole behavior is typical for the Linux community. Add to a discussion by saying nothing except that you know better. And it causes the other party to feel needlessly attacked and reply to your statements trying to set them straight - just like Mark has been doing over the last months.

This is exactly what this whole discussion about Mir vs Wayland has been like since it began. A bunch of crybabies on both sides arguing back and forth about basically nothing or who knows what better than the other. With discussions like these we won't come any step closer to a solution. In turn simply sitting down and creating a solution might bring us closer - even if it is not optimal.
 
+Samium Gromoff Mark was pointing his finger at a person that it will support Windows but won't support Mir. He wasn't talking about an entire project. Martin was open about not supporting Mir because of it's 1 distro focus. And if you will go and read KWin mission statement you will realize that Mark has thrown yet another lie...
 
+Lilian Moraru Calling Mark Shuttleworth to come out and have a public discussion about mir? That's childish. And stupid.

But, on the other hand, most of the developers out there are completely inept at social interactions and anti-social to the point that they should be forbidden from making public comments about their work. Most of the time it's just flaming, turd throwing, and gross overreactions to someone else's words.
 
+Harald Glatt I feel no obligation to back 'my claim' unless you do first - since you introduced the idea to this thread. Which is totally irrelevant to the issue at hand: One self proclaimed major Linux player sprouting nonsense about other projects.
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner And you don't see the similarity in what you assess about my statements and what you think of Marks? I think you argue by the premise that if someone isn't of the same opinion that you have then they are simply wrong. Nobody knows the ultimate truth, not even you - and opinions are just that. There needs to be no 'discussion' further than making sure that everyone has a chance to know everyone elses opinion on something. I don't think it's besides the point. It is exactly the point.
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner LOL see? You are doing it again. Trying to make me look less informed and adding 0 value to the discussion. At this point you are going onto the troll list. Thanks.
 
Yeah! Concuration is always great. Mark, Aron, Kristian, All of you guys, I really thank you!
 
+Lilian Moraru, “We do not accept patches to support one downstream. If there are downstream specific patches they should be applied downstream.”.  Note the "we".  Note the Windows support.  Just childish, as already said before.
 
If opposition is purely political it should be easy for mark to demonstrate the technical superiority of Mir, and justify the decision to sideline Wayland.

bated breath
 
+Lilian Moraru, actually, given the tremendous, multidimensional gap between Windows and Ubuntu, I retract my words.  This is no longer childish.  This is outright hypocrisy.
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner
"Then how can you partake in a discussion you have no idea of?"
I'm simply express my opinion, not about the Thecnicalitys or what is best, butpointing out whay this not important. In the end, when the projects are done, we will see if A is better than B, equal or what else.

Canonical wants MIR so they created. Other company want Wayland they stick with it. End of story.

What Mark say or Aron says going to influence the end user? I don't think so. If you like Ubuntu, you will continue to use it, if you like fedora you will continue to use it, and soo on.

If you don't understand that pointless discussions abou what how is the best or not, is time consuming and a losse of time, and losse of time and bad "moods" is equal a less code and/or less quality code, you are to envolved with it.

The best way to prove that someone is wrong is to make our "product" the best it can be and them, when people start to use and compare the "products" people going to chose the best, or eventually the less good product going to die. Is sad to read that not tech people can't try to calm done the techs guys by pointing something that is comun sense.


In my country we have a saying :"If the horse gives you a kick you going to kick him too?"
 
+miguel pires The 'pointless discussion' was started by a pointless rant. Nothing else we are discussing here than false accusations and insults against upstream projects by Mark Shuttleworth that must be addressed. Why should world+dog quietly accept such misinformation?

+Samium Gromoff You have no idea what you are talking about. kwin does not support Windows. Again, one false argument that only ever came to life by Ubuntu backers.
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner
Soo people going to have this pointless discussions because someone make "false accusations and insults"?! Or is better to prove the guy is wrong by make a better product and then prove that the guy was wrong??

You can't "kick the horse" because he going to "kick" back!!!! Prove that the guy is wrong is the better thing to do, because, in the end, if he is wrong, he will be obligated to "kill" is project and use the other project.

Thats what i think, some of the people that have writting in this "place" are talking about. Stop the noise, let him talk to the "air" in the end, if Waylland is better he going to have to adimited. The other whay make a cort action against him about the "false accusations and insults".

Comum sense is the better way in something like this. Sorry if this don't met your standars in discussions.
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner, KWin does not support Windows, indeed.  It's just that the rest of the KDE does -- which makes it a non-technical stance.  Please tell me this says nothing about KDE's attitude.  And while we're at it, admit that you are simply unable to exercise empathy towards Mark.  And without empathy (on both sides) this conflict will never end.  Unless something dies, that is.
 
+Samium Gromoff KWin doesn't support Windows and never will (as I once said to one of the KDE Windows maintainers: "I'm proud to maintain the only part of KDE which will never work on Windows"). I find it highly ridiculous that Mark brings up that point given that I'm a known opponent of supporting anything except a standard Linux stack (which includes systemd). I have raised my concerns about support the BSDs or Solaris several times and that is well known. Just this week you will find a review request to adjust to a BSD where I am more on the contra side and recommended to carry the patch downstream.

So right now KWin runs on Kubuntu but does not run on Windows. KWin also used to work on Ubuntu, but Canonical decided to implement Unity as a plugin to Compiz thus making it impossible for KWin to be usable on Ubuntu. Not my fault.
 
+Samium Gromoff Some applications are able to run on Windows, major parts are not. Unfortunately, konsole is one of them, so I am unable to get a sane terminal in some unpleasant environments.

+miguel pires It is not a matter of proving him wrong. Development of all the mentioned upstream projects is going ahead anyway no matter what. Kudos to your pacifist stance on the matter, but developers are human beings and who are you to deny them their right to set things straight?
 
+Samium Gromoff everything which runs on Windows will also run on Mir - mostly often because it runs on Windows as the X11 dependency got abstracted away. Only what does not run on Windows would need to be adjusted to run on Mir. So where exactly is this now a problem?
 
+Martin Gräßlin, thank you for clearing it up.  I was in the wrong.

I guess, the remaining sad part is how anti-Ubuntu perceptions are fueled by the train of thought like "Mir is so pariah KDE won't even touch it".

It's clearly not your fault, but let's face it -- in this war of worldviews many people (who, otherwise, should know better) are seeing it like that.
 
(Disclaimer: I'm a Fedora user.  Fled Ubuntu due to annoying bugs. Largely in vain.)
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner
I know my english is not good but this is not what i've sayed: "who are you to deny them their right to set things straight?"

I'm not denying the right to them to do what they want. I'm pointing out another alternatives with less noise, do you understand? If you are envolved in a fight sometimes is needed that other people try to calm down the things and point other alternatives.
But if is bad noise what Linux ecossystem need, ok!

Pointing diferent paths is not denying any right to anyone...
 
Being a (Debian) end user and hobby developer my view on the entire Ubuntu thing is that it seems more and more like the well known embrace extend and extinguish tactics used by another nasty company. Looking forward to the debate if it ever happens.
 
+Svein Engelsgjerd, that is a legitimate concern that I share as well.  At this point, however, I think only time can clarify the true intentions of Canonical.
 
+miguel pires
My dad once said about marriage: 'Never go to sleep after a fight before things are completely cleared out, even if it takes till morning.'

All this talk about 'code, don't fight' is very naive and won't solve anything as this will happen again and again till the different parties really will sit together for a good discussion.
But will Mark accept the invitation from Aaron?
 
+Gunter Schelfhout 

Bad analogy. Those two are not married AFAIK.

It's obvious why spouses have to continually care about hygiene of their relationship. Since they are stuck with each other, they have to care.

But these two are free to go wherever they feel and do whatever they want.

So why should they waste time in pointless debates ?

let the code talk, the rest will fall in its place automatically...
 
+Branko Badrljica Now, let's direct that question at Mark? He seems butthurt that no one jumped into bed with Mir at once - or what else is his motivation to fan the fire once again?

+miguel pires you called it pointless discussions several times - that do seem to be attempts to turn them down.
 
+Gunter Schelfhout, a merely technical debate will be pointless -- the actual conflict won't resolve unless the desire for mutual FUD-bombing ceases.  And that animosity goes far beyond technical.  The usual kerfuffle involving mistakes, hurt egoes and blood-stricken eyes.

The way +Aaron Seigo announced his proposal, I don't see him really seeing it like this -- he only seems to see politics directed against him.
No better than +Mark Shuttleworth, really.  Except it's the latter who is being victimised so far, not the former. Not fair.
 
Seigo, why can't you give Mark Shuttleworth the benefit of the doubt?
 
+Branko Badrljica
Sigh. Spouses are partners. Are you implying that Ubuntu/Canonical isn't a partner of the larger community?

Yes, all this could be ignored and energy could be put in the code. In the mean time the 'partners' are diverting more and more till a point in time where converting becomes impossible.
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner 

Why ? Why would we gain with it ?
I don't care about Mark's or anyone else's feelings, unles they are tied to code I care about.

Which they are not.
Code and technical merrits are relevant. "Feelings" are not. At least not here.
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner
When I say "pointless discussions" is because one thing: this going to be over when the products are finalised, and we going to see if the allegations from Mark or Waylland people are correct or not!

If you look with a different angle, you see that someone sayed that the product A can't achieve what they need soo they going to make product B. (take of the noise you and others are pointing (insults and false statements))

How can I prove that he is wrong? with a product, only when is finalised and it proves it self (or not).

Soo Mir / Wayland only going to be over when they are finalised, and if one of them is not good the community going to chose the best of it.

I hoppe I made my self clear and you understand my point of view.
 
+Gunter Schelfhout, of course, and that's the bigger problem. You cannot resolve a conflict without discussing feelings.

Another problem is that Aaron cannot speak for the entire anti-Ubuntu community, in the way in which Mark can speak for the Ubuntu community.
 
Look, nobody believes that the conflict is technical. To be fair, any such thoughts on +Mark Shuttleworth's part were uninformed at best, delusional at worst.

Yet the conflict exists. There is no point in a technical discussion, unless community/control issues are addressed -- but nobody even tried to do that.

Way to go..
 
+miguel pires I understand your point of view perfectly well, but it is out of scope of this thread. This is about a specific action of one party and reaction of another.
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner
We are going to be able to aggre in desaggre about this. :)
the reaction can be different if they choose that path...
Pointin out other paths is not out of scope...
Best regards
 
+miguel pires I need to ask again: Have you read Mark's blog, and would you stay calm and code away silently without further addressing his claims?
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner

Yes I read, and I'm not a very calm guy!
But in similar situations (in my professional life) I opted for prepare my "case" and then when things are done, completly crush the personne! And believe after the job is done (prepare the thing to prove I'm right) no one can shut me and I will continue destroing the guy intill I'm satified!

That what i do, prove i'm right and them destoy the guy. To prove I'm right I've to finish the thing.
 
For whatever it is worth: I do not always agree with +Aaron Seigo  and half of the time I do not understand +Martin Gräßlin technical postings. But I do know they do fantastic hard and inspiring work for KDE and FOSS. At the same time I am a (K)ubuntu user and w/o Mark Shuttleworth I doubt it would exist.

So I want the best of it: Ubuntu base and KDE on top.

I find myself torn here. I admire Mark and Ubuntu but do not appreciate the Mir direction. And the language used here seems inappropriate. So I think Mark owes you one +Aaron Seigo 
 
I think by Mark's accusations of a "tea party" he is admitting that he is in a party. So it's sort of hypocritical. Also by using "tea party" he's insinuating his party are the progressive bleeding edge visionaries.

 Linux is not windows or osx to be defined by one, two or a thousand parties. Some people like what they do some don't. Not quite sure how deeply ol Marky get's that that is ok and good... 
 
People seem to forget or have very little understanding of the problem. Maybe some simply just don't care about free and open source software. I don't know...

But let's say Mir get traction.. and everyone start to support that display server and Wayland fades to the unmaintained. That would mean the whole Linux community would depend on CLA ridden software! And be under the influence of Canonical in everything they do. That would be a major problem. The problem is not just all the lies of Mark and what people around him say. The problem is how Canonical act towards the Linux community. How they implement their projects.

A lot of Ubuntu users seem not to know of the problematics this bring.. or does not care.
 
The easiest way to resolve the concern over Mir is for Wayland to be so well developed and supported that Mir becomes an afterthought. I hope Mir is helping to motivate Wayland development.

We can't really blame Canonical for doing their own thing, it's not like Wayland is shipping anywhere, at least that I've heard of. The lies about Wayland are another thing entirely. Canonical should correct those statements.
 
+Aaron Seigo I don't always agree with you, but I have a lot of respect for you. I can always count on you to be the most level headed and most polite person in the blogosphere.
 
So, given the protocol of wayland (and mir) is in flux more or less, what is the problem of having 2 independent implementations, maybe, end up agreeing on a shared protocol?

Personally I dislike Mir codebase and I hope some of the issues with the wayland protocol gets fixed. (By the way, calling systemd a problem is not libel IMHO)
 
Indeed what +Joshua Kiley just said is exactly what I was going to say too... +Daniel Sandman indeed one cannot unlicense what was already released, at least not with GPL derived licenses. However, Canonical can create proprietary forks with features excluded from the GPL release, or in the future choose entirely different license terms going forward.  The problem for me with Canonical in general, and Mir is a perfect example, is that they start new projects from scratch simply because they are not in control of something or could not gain "control" of an existing project through favoritism, like how they tried and failed to with KDE.  That is not how communities work and it is fraudulent for them to falsely describe themselves that way.
 
Personally I don't understand how a debate over this issue could be considered the mature solution it is obvious that neither party is willing to back down on the issue or consider the others point of view as reasonable. Therefore such a discussion can only serve to drive the communitys apart. Though this may be Mr Seigo's goal it is unfair of him to ask this of Mr Shuttlworth who not only stands more to lose in such a debate but who is also crippled by the privacy needs of Canonical who he would be representing.
 
+Tycho Softworks, they won't be able to do that surreptitiously, don't you think?  And once they do -- they will kill any legitimacy they have, and they absolutely know this.

I don't believe that CLA is designed with that disastrous intent.  More FUD aimed at Canonical, IOW.
 
I'm not a tech genius but I have been reading up on this mir and wayland stuff. Why is everybody getting that panties in a bunch over what +Mark Shuttleworth   said? I read it over and over and what Mark said I don't think this is the the response it deserves. A dude say something about a Tea party and +Jono Bacon  comes try to throw in his 2 cents ( Which I would have said the same thing ) then everybody starts getting on there case. If +Jono Bacon had replied with something more rude I would understand everybody else's comeback's. But you all are just ridiculous. Now I didn't read every single comment so if you wasn't being rude then I'm not directing this toward you. What I've read over is completely ridiculous including coming from the +Aaron Seigo. I just had to say something because a lot of what people are saying is complete non-sense. How do you know how much technical knowledge +Mark Shuttleworth  has? all because he made a mistake and he talks for canonical a lot of you all ASSUME he doesn't know a lot. The dude had to know a lot to get where he at now. A lot of you know darn well if you was in +Mark Shuttleworth  place you would have said something. I wonder did Google have this problem you see they went with surfaceflinger... You want to show somebody you are right and what you are doing is right?: Shut up and make your product better than theirs. I believe what +Mark Shuttleworth  and his  team is doing what's right. If it wasn't for Ubuntu I would have never been introduced to the linux world

Say what you want about me but I call it like I see it
 
I too don't understand why you're losing your temper on something like this. Mark and Canonical are just trying to create their own replacement to X server, this is actually productive since it creates new softwares and competitivity. If I was in their position, seeing companies like Intel choosing not to support Mir, when it is supposed to be shipped with a lot of successful distros (Ubuntu and its derivatives), would really make me angry as well. Open source's power is the choice, so please work together and competitively to make products shippable and better.
 
+Samium Gromoff +Tycho Softworks The point I was trying to make was why no other projects would be able to use it. Some of the commenter's seemed to think that was possible. Sure they could fork it.. or support a project that does not have a CLA.

The CLA is about not wanting to be truly open. To have total control. Which is not a good thing for us liking Linux. Why people have a problem with it.
 
This makes me think if the reformers of the Protestant reformation never stood up and fought against the abuses going on against the Roman catholic church. Too dismiss constructive peer review is just bad engineering and shows that your project cannot bare the weight of criticism.
 
+Martin Naskovski Canonical is writing (and maintaining out of tree) painting backends for Qt and Gtk+. Both toolkits internally abstract away the native graphics system code. So this is feasible, it just means more maintenance for Canonical. Which is their decision to make, and I see no problem with that.
 
Can we please stop this "Linux is about choice" nonsense? Yes, it's good to have choice -- in areas which are far up the stack and which users interact with every day. It's good there are dozens of different file managers -- they fulfill the needs of different users.
It's not good to have five different, competing, half-working ways to draw a pixel on the screen; having just one way which everyone supports and which works reliably is very much preferable, because neither the end users nor the developers profit from the "choice".
 
+miguel pires " I'm a regular user and when i read this type of comments make wonder way people continue to "argue" about this"

There have been two ongoing issues that have caused problems here.

Firstly, people from Canonical, including Mark himself, have repeatedly stated falsehoods about other software including Wayland and KWin. These weren't even just "oh, that's a little bit not 100% technically correct" but blatant outright falsehoods such as "Wayland does not have input handling code" or "Wayland's windowing model may not be secure". While I completely agree with you that we are all better off cooperating, when one group goes out of their way to get things that wrong it makes it very difficult.

The second issue is that unlike having yet another music player (for example) having another graphics system has significant implications for Free software. Another graphics system means more work for driver developers who now have to test against more permutations; it means more work for toolkit developers as they need to maintain support for more windowing systems and test that code; it means more work for application developers who need to test on more permutations particularly when working on desktop integration features that will not work the same on both Wayland and Mir. This is especially true for mobile where every % of performance matters and GPU drivers are usually pretty horrid.

It also impacts support. Today we can give generic "how to fix your x.org" instructions that work pretty well everywhere; if nothing else the troubleshooting instructions are identical. With multiple graphics systems we now have multiple support stories. Try selling that with a straight face to the corporate/government/education markets.

All that effort is spent for no additional benefit. Read that sentence again, because that's the important point: more effort, no benefit.

Mark has asserted that only the toolkit developers are affects, and that they will maintain the toolkit patches. The latter is correct, but the former is absolutely false.

This is why it matters.

Now, I really don't care if Ubuntu switches to Mir, that is their decision. The worst thing that could happen, however, is N% of distros go to Mir and M% go to Wayland and 100-(N+M)% stay with x.org (because of the chaos if nothing else). That would be a significant setback. 
 
+Harald Glatt "Mark is in a constant position of justifying himself in this discussion which means that he keeps getting attacked"

Nobody attacked Mark. The last I spoke of Mir with anyone from Canonical it was a suggestion that they work on making Mir awesome (my exact words) and let's let the conversation die. Let the tech speak, right?

The last I've seen anyone talk about Mir it was when Canonical said they were not going to default the desktop to Mir because XMir doesn't due multi-screen well enough and Matthew Garret wrote a blog post about all the other things it doesn't do well enough yet. His blog post was amazingly positive given Matthew's usual tone, and he didn't attack Mir at all. He pointed out the issues with XMir and suggested that instead of trying to make something that might never work well to just move ahead with porting things to Mir proper. There was nothing mean or even negative in Matthew's entry.

Yet Mark keeps reigniting the discussion for no apparent reason with extreme flame-bait. Normally I ignore trolls, but when the troll is a leader of a large community they create a large community of trolls if not dealt with.

My whole desire with getting this discussed in a direct and open event is to bring real information, from both sides, to the community instead of the flamebait we saw in Mark's blog.
 
+Aaron Seigo, you state many true things, but then you say:

"All that effort is spent for no additional benefit. Read that sentence again, because that's the important point: more effort, no benefit."

You seem to have some absolute POV on benefit.  I doubt that such a POV could be true.

What I'm certain about, is that Canonical didn't decide to switch off Wayland for nothing.  There must have been a reason.

And perhaps, just perhaps, the reason was the already-high, at the moment, level of animosity towards Ubuntu, which might have led to some less-than-adequate negotiations.

Or maybe Mark is indeed an evil miscreant, as you seem to suggest.

What are other possible reasons?  Sigh.  Only +Mark Shuttleworth can tell, but what he says now is by far not clear enough.

Helps noone.  The conflict will not go away by itself.
 
+Roshan P Koshy "feel that you are disappointed by +Mark Shuttleworth 's comments. But you should go ahead  with your valuable work, coz the truth is that +Mark Shuttleworth had experienced and love Mir and you likewise for Wayland"

Actually, that isn't at all what I'm thinking or feeling. My passion is not for Wayland, it is for whatever is best for Free software and in terms of graphics systems we had at one point broad consensus on Wayland. Now that is thrown to the wind, and it was done in a most confrontational way by Canonical, not by creating their own thing but by lieing about Wayland in the process and publishing flamebait like in this blog entry.

I am not disappointed by Mark's comments, I am concerned that others, particularly in the Ubuntu community, will pick up his incorrect and anti-social posture and repeat it. We have seen this happen in the past, which makes sense as that's how people work. So my concern is not actually with trying to "fix" Mark, but to ensure there is as little damage done in the community due to Mark's decision to be a troll.

And yes, I'm not stopping my work either .. I can actually do this and my work :)

I appreciate your concern, however. Thanks!
 
+Naum Rusomarov "Calling Mark Shuttleworth to come out and have a public discussion about mir?"

Would you rather I responded in my blog with a troll/flame in response?

Would you rather discussion that is quite clearly not over (at least not for Mark, which is why he brought it up yet again) happen in private where nobody can hear or participate in it?

The most responsible thing I can think of doing in such a case is inviting someone to a public discussion to sort matters out. It's how adults solve problems: sitting down and talking them through.

If you have an alternative suggestion, I'm happy to hear it.

(And no, "ignore it" is not an option since Mark refuses to let it go and keeps increasing the flamebait level; and what Mark does many in the Ubuntu community imitate. That's why Mark as a troll can not be ignored if we care about the Free software community.)
 
+Aaron Seigo "Go home, Jono, you are neither wanted nor needed here."

I was under the impression that anyone was welcome to participate in the discussion?

Some folks in this thread think that I am here to defend Mark and his blog post. Some feel I am here to make Mark's point and to quash people who question Canonical's strategy. Some feel I am just an echo-chamber for anything Canonical does. Everyone is of course welcome to think what they like about me, I am not here to change your opinion.

But to be clear, I am here in this discussion speaking as myself, not as a Canonical employee, not as a representative of Ubuntu. These are my views, my opinions formed out of a love for the wider Free Software community, not just Ubuntu, but a concern about how our wider community is functioning.

I think we have real problem in the wider Free Software community with people being overly aggressive, rude, and intolerant about technical and strategic differences. upstart vs. systemd...Mir vs. Wayland...these are valuable debates to have and there are valuable perspectives to be shared, and I have always been in favour of full and frank debate where we can get into the details of why people disagree on particular topics. Unfortunately though, all too often some people drive these discussions into venomous he-said-she-said finger pointing and name-calling with too much focus on taking sides and scoring points rather than furthering the discussion.

It just feels so unnecessary to me. I don't understand why we can't engage around our technical and strategic differences with respect and without personal animos, and to be crystal clear:  My point here applies to everyone;  I expect Mark, Canonical, and the Ubuntu community to subscribe to the same level of respect and leave the personal animos out of the picture.

Of course, we all make mistakes from time to time. I once called RMS "childish" based on some views he shared on Ubuntu, and that was wrong of me to do so. I should have engaged with Richard around the issue and the merits of both of our perspectives...and not belittle his perspective by labeling it "childish". As such I publicly apologized. I feel I should always be accountable to my words and others should be too.

Getting back to the original point of the post, I don't think a "debate" on LAS will do anything but be a spectacle that further entrench people. It will not further the relationship between Mir and Wayland or help the projects to collaborate, it will simply carve another gap between different parts of the Open Source community. If there are discussions to be had, they are better on project mailing lists with the goal of solving specific problems and challenges.

I know some of you will think I am going "full kumbaya" but I think we just need to live and let live and respect the diversity in our projects. +Aaron Seigo and +Martin Gräßlin do wonderful work on KDE that bring pleasure to millions of computer users. Likewise +Lennart Poettering has been solving tough challenges in Linux for many years that helped make everyone's Free Software experience better. The Wayland team (and folks like +Daniel Stone) are pulling out all the stops to build the best display server they can, and the same can be said for the Mir and X teams. Likewise +Mark Shuttleworth and Ubuntu is working to make Open Source easier for people to use across devices and the cloud.

All of these people are good people doing honourable work. Sometimes we just need to respect our differences and that is all I am trying to say here. None of this is designed to make people side with Canonical or Ubuntu, as I said, I am speaking independently here...I care about our wider community and I just hope we can work together to respect the diversity that we all bring.
 
+Samium Gromoff "The way +Aaron Seigo announced his proposal, I don't see him really seeing it like this -- he only seems to see politics directed against him."

Thankfully you are wrong, Samium. I do not see politics directed at me as the issue. I see a community leader (Mark) who has decided to deal with this particular issue, which has huge potential impact on the future of Free software, by trolling. As a community leader, others mimic him. That is the last thing we need: an army of trolls rather than sound decision making.

I do not like the precedent of libeling others in a blog as a way to address these sorts of issues.

I do not think sound technical decisions can be made by trying to convince people by trolling.

I want to see the Free software community able to discuss things openly, accurately and in an adult manner.

Mark has decided to go in the other direction, and as a leader in the community that example needs to be exposed for the bad idea it is before others adopt it.

Imagine if the next graphics stack for Free software (singular or plural) was made primarily based on who trolled the best?

That concerns me deeply and that is why I took this issue up.
 
+Quid Fit "Personally I don't understand how a debate over this issue could be considered the mature solution it is obvious that neither party is willing to back down on the issue or consider the others point of view as reasonable"

Like so many others in this thread, you put project negative motivations on to me that simply do not exist.

I am absolutely willing to be swayed by evidence and reason. I am absolutely open to considering, in a serious an adult fashion, the points of others.

I have done so throughout this debacle, and will continue to do so.

Now, I don't know where you, or the others who have said similar things, justify making character judgments about a person you don't know. You may wish to reconsider that approach.

Cheers ...
 
+Sven Brauch You've loaded your bases and gone on to attack.

"It's not good to have five different, competing, half-working ways"

Lets face facts here, this is linux, we have:

3 different packaging formats (rpm, deb, .tar.gz) (how's that for splitting the entire linux world directly in two?)
5+ DE's (KDE, Gnome, Unity, XFCE, LXDE)
10+ Browsers
5+ Package managers
20 text editors
4000 music players
2 Network managers
and a partridge in a pear tree.

Your comment could be applied to ANY new application, someone wants to make a new awesome text editor like Sublime Text? I'M SORRY WE ALREADY HAVE 20 HALF WORKING TEXT EDITORS, GO AWAY.

Linux is not about choice, correct, but to say Linux doesn't involve 'choice' at any step of the way is incorrect.

"having just one way which everyone supports and which works reliably is very much preferable"

Which is a false dichotomy, here's what you're saying repackaged to be more obvious:

We don't need to have a choice between a dump and a baron wasteland, we should have one perfect paradise which works amazingly and everyone gets along and everything is great.

Having 2 display managers is no more destructive to the 'linux community' than having 3 package formats, and lets face facts here, linux has lived and breathed on Xorg for the last 10 years, it can't get much more worse than this.
 
+jonA than "Why is everybody getting that panties in a bunch over what +Mark Shuttleworth   said?"

Please read my comments above this one, it is all explained. I understand that not everyone is well informed on the issue, such as yourself.

Those who aren't well informed would be the ones best served by a public discussion such as I suggested because then we'd have a clear and easy to reference source of information on that matter.

I would expect people such as yourself who are scratching their head over what the big deal is to be some of those most welcoming of a public discussion since you'd find out what the big deal is or, maybe, even confirm that there is no big deal. No matter which way it turns, we'll all be much further ahead in terms of knowledge and understanding.
 
+Aaron Seigo do you believe that their is anything that mark could say that would justify mir over Wayland for Ubuntu?
 
I would really like to see this debate, I think it would be good for everyone.
 
+David James "Having 2 display managers is no more destructive to the 'linux community' than having 3 package formats,"

Having a variety of package formats is hell for application developers and for users who look for documentation for how to do basic things. It's not good.

Your suggesting that we spread that kind of problem to even more areas.

We've hand consensus on the display server technology for 15-20 years now and that has been very, very helpful.

Just because Free software is messed up in one place (package formats) is no justification to do that elsewhere (graphics systems).

What we really ought to be doing is trying to fix things like the package management crazyness. Yes, it will take a lot of time, but eventually we can get there if we want to for at least the vast majority of distributions (by usage). We shouldn't be trying to replicate that madness.
 
That said, the debate would be a good thing, indeed.
 
+Quid Fit " do you believe that their is anything that mark could say that would justify mir over Wayland for Ubuntu?"

Absolutely. I don't know of anything that would justify Mir over Wayland right now, but I'm willing to accept that maybe I am missing something. I'd be happy to hear what that something is. I am always open to new evidence.
 
+Aaron Seigo, as much as I agree with you on gratuitious forking, it should not be interpreted as grounds for vilification, by itself.
 
+Samium Gromoff We're in perfect agreement. I don't think gratuitious forking is grounds for vilification.

It is often (but not always!) a poor decision for Free software in the "big picture", but it can result in positive things too.

I do think that Free software would be better of with less forking than we have now, but I don't see it as a damning issue on anyone. It's simply an ineficiency we force on ourselves (collectively).

The Mir situation has never been about gratutious forking, however.
 
"Mir is really important work. When lots of competitors attack a project on purely political grounds, you have to wonder what THEIR agenda is. At least we know now who belongs to the Open Source Tea Party "

Intel's rejection Mir was a big hit and must of have better ground than just a "political" reason.. so I don't buy it Shuttleworth.
 
"Thankfully you are wrong, Samium. I do not see politics directed at me as the issue."

+Aaron Seigo, I am happy to be wrong.  Thank you!
 
+Aaron Seigo I agree we should try and minimise the damage where necessary, but ultimately there are only a few 'end results':

Wayland is better, Mir gives up
Mir is better, Wayland gives up
Wayland and Mir split linux in 2 (again)

I don't see why it's worth having these ultimately unnecessary and just plain toxic arguments when the outcome is already decided (without getting to philosophical).

We know how to deal with multiple versions of things sucking (rpm, vs deb), we know how to deal with having multiple things that are great (emacs vs vi / chrome vs firefox).

I believe what we are participating in right now isn't about Mir or Wayland, it is political and the reason why we are having 'yet another' pointless debate is because Ubuntu is popular, or should I say 'too popular', here is my reasoning:

If Mir is technically crap, runs horrible and Ubuntu remains popular,  *and* Ubuntu doesn't back down on Mir, then there's a chance the Wayland guys will give up, and the 'linux community' will have to suffer the consequences of dealing with xorg 2.0.

The argument has shifted from a technical perspective Mir vs Wayland, to a political one, why does Canonical/Ubuntu have the ability to make crap software and push that onto the linux community?

This was the core of Richard Stallmans 'ubuntu is spyware' argument, he said that normally the linux community will shun the poor software, and the better software will survive, but in Ubuntu's case, this is no longer in effect, Ubuntu has reached a position where it can do what it wants, and no matter how many comments the linux community makes on youtube videos and ars technica articles, the linux community is ultimately powerless in stopping Ubuntu.

At this stage I have no answer for that question, and I'm sure while the question goes unanswered we'll see plenty more shots fired on both sides of the table.
 
+Aaron Seigo, to truly put this conflict to end, we must get +Mark Shuttleworth out of his siege mentality.

Mark seems to believe that Intel and Red Hat are out to get Canonical.
If only he shared why he believes that, in details, perhaps there would be a chance to allay his fears.

Until he speaks out on this issue -- this will not end (well).
 
I never was a fan of the ideas and methods of Canonical ..
 
+Jono Bacon but so often, it is Canonical creating these problems. Things like announcing a project with lies about a competing one in (it's very difficult to have a technical debate about two competing technologies when one side has massive misapprehensions); things like childish insults. Very rarely do I see this from the community. 

I think that you responded to the RMS thing very well - apologising. It's a pity we will not see +Mark Shuttleworth doing the same.
 
+Jono Bacon IDGRA which public forum or medium this happens in, so long as it does. I actually quite like both +Mark Shuttleworth and +Aaron Seigo 's back and forth even in G+ comments (even the odd time conversation has become 'childish').

The strong clashing of opinion happens in every organization, even online communities. The difference between good and shit ones is how we deal with them. I think people perceive you as siding with Canonical because you only comment here. You say your words apply to Mark, but they are not found on the comment section of his blog, only here.

Interestingly enough, this may be a difference of real politics. +Mark Shuttleworth seems to think projects competing with each other will bring about better code, while +Aaron Seigo seems to think that more cooperation (and less competition) will. Which approach is better? I really don't know. I think each approach has their merits in different cases. 
 
Yal are something else. If +Mark Shuttleworth ignores all these people I wouldn't blame him. I honestly don't think you are trying to solve anything by calling out +Mark Shuttleworth in public. Because calling him out in public as you can see isn't doing anything but making people talk trash and backing you up. You should have talked to him one on one so it wouldn't be any disruptions like you got going on right now.

I do tip my hat to +Jono Bacon for coming here and trying to tell people a debate would be useless because it would. but as you can see you got people steady saying crap about +Mark Shuttleworth 
 
+David James "I don't see why it's worth having these ultimately unnecessary and just plain toxic arguments when the outcome is already decided "

You are making the mistaken assumption that better technology wins. It only wins out if technologies are allowed to compete on their merits. 

When business and politics are the primary guiding factors, then VHS wins over Beta (to use the obvious historical example). When people spread misinformation and FUD, well then we get Microsoft Windows ;)

I'd like these kinds of things in Free software to be decided in a meritocratic / scientific manner. Since that is in danger of not happening in this case, I'm asking for open, fair and public discussion.

I don't see how that is unreasonable, but I do understand how thinking "well, the best will win out in the end" often leads to disappointment.
 
+Samium Gromoff "we must get +Mark Shuttleworth out of his siege mentality."

I don't know if that is possible. I will rejoice if it is because it is indeed a "best possible result".

However, it is up to him. Due to the nature of the mindset, there is very little anyone external can do without him moving first. He needs to come out of his castle to see the siege does not exist.

"If only he shared why he believes that, in details, perhaps there would be a chance to allay his fears."

Indeed.

FWIW, there has been a lot of competition between the companies you mention. Perhaps (and this is only speculation on my part), Mark perceives competition in terms of threats.

I will also note, without going into details, that the way Mir has been handled is not the first time Canonical has taken such a path. This has not endeared them to certain people in industry, and I think that's understandable. I don't know that anyone is out to "get" Canonical per se, but there certainly are groups out there who are not their friend because of such actions.

This is another reason I'd like to have a public discussion with Mark about Mir : I think that would be a far healthier and less friend-losing way for Mark to engage with others in industry compared to the choices he tends to make in these situations. Sniping on blogs does nothing but dig the hole deeper; a public 'face to face', even if it doesn't end in agreement, is far more likely to give us a starting point from which to move forward.

"this will not end (well)."

For Canonical, perhaps .. perhaps not.

Without question, however, the rest of the Free software community can survive it and even grow stronger by learning useful object lessons along the way. 

Personally, I am committed to doing what I can to ensure that happens.
 
+jonA than "Because calling him out in public as you can see isn't doing anything but making people talk trash and backing you up."

So if I understand you correctly .. the reason I'm "wrong" here is because other people agree with me?

Personally I'll judge the usefulness of my actions here based on the future direction of the Mir issue, not on how many people agree with me (or don't).

"You should have talked to him one on one so it wouldn't be any disruptions like you got going on right now."

I have spoken more times that I can count to Mark one-on-one: in person, on the phone, by skype, by email .. ditto with Jono Bacon, for that matter (who I've known personally longer than he's been with Canonical). It has on occasion been fruitful. Often it hasn't. In this case, it is Mark who decided to not talk one-on-one and instead go public with his trolling.

The issue we ought to be dealing with is that of constructive public communication in the community; and by extension: how to best chart the shared future of the Free software platforms as they evolve.
 
+David James You are wrongly assuming that we have infinite resources. You've listed some very valid reasons actually why Linux still isn't #1 marketshare on Desktop, but is now dominating the mobile market. 

Android has succeeded exactly because it has 1 package management system, and, it hasn't been fragmented much. Programming resources are used efficiently. Multiple text editors aren't a problem (they all use the exact same input/output), but, multiple packaging systems has probably wasted thousands of developer hours (at least) by now, with very little benefit. Also, it drives endusers away from Linux because many apps are only available in one of the format's, and most of the time, those that are available in a few, are outdated in some. 

Having both Mir and Wayland fragment the market too, because QT, game developers, driver developers, GTK, Enlightment, Openstep, all need to accomodate both Mir/Wayland if there is a 50% market split (Testing and codewise). Both projects can't be right, and if they both merge, the resulting product can evolve significantly faster (maybe not 2x as fast, but almost double). Also, it leaves very little developer resources left for optimising, which we will need long term to compete against Windows/OSX... 

Having both Mir/Wayland will simply scare end-users away from Linux, when they find that some apps don't work as expected on their distro (because the developer has only tested on the other). We need to get this sorted ASAP. Contrary to popular belief, plenty of damage has been caused by all these varying backend standards (which all offer almost the same thing, and just require more development work/resources)
 
+Aaron Seigo I'm not sure if you missed the second half of my comment but I'm not assuming the better technology wins, the second half of my comment and my rationale as to why we're even discussing this relies on the better technology not winning. 

If Mir turns out to be fantastic and Wayland gracefully falls off to the side, this will all be a waste of breath and I'll go to sleep (8am here), but everything we are discussing right now hinges on Mir turning out to be crap, and Wayland still falling off to the side because of Ubuntu's popularity, as you said, that would put us in a VHS winning over Beta situation.

Some questions I have:

- With Intel rejecting Mir's patches and Canonical accepting this, is it an all or nothing approach, can Intel, AMD, nVidia only choose 1 to support, Mir or Wayland?

- If Canonical are as happy as they appear to be in taking on the Mir/Intel workload by themselves:

- How big a workload hit is having Mir and Wayland active together going to cause? Are we talking millions of hours as linux volunteer's struggle under the crushing weight of porting code line by line from Mir to Wayland and vice versa? Or is this actually not an issue for the linux community at all, it's purely down to the paid software devs in AMD/nVidia/Canonical factories?

But most importantly:

- If the predicted large majority of linux distro's use Wayland and ignore Mir, is there any reasonable belief that development on Wayland would ever stop or yield to Mir even if either one was a better technology?

- And if development on Wayland is unlikely to stop, and the majority of linux distro's are fully committed to ignoring Mir and supporting Wayland, and the workload impact is limited, why does this even matter? It leads us right to the meritocracy argument, who cares if Ubuntu has the VHS Display Manager to Debian or Arch or Mint's Beta, Ubuntu has the right to make their distro as bad as they want, they could make the default wallpaper a giant penis if they wanted, they have that right, this is the nature of open source, use the software/distro that is best for you.
 
+Aaron Seigo good to hear that you are willing to accept that mark may have a reasonable motivation to support the creation of mir. Its good to hear that you have an open mind to this and respect your need for answers. However would Mark not be at a disadvantage in your proposed debate as he would would be forced to both respect the privacy of Canonical and represent their stance with mir. For example because the development of MIR seems to be tied to the development of the phone and tablet platform which in turn is tied to the private discussions between carrier's and manufactures it is likely that some of the motivation behind MIR development simply is not Marks to disclose.
I also find it unfair to put him in a position where he would be forced to disagree with you on every standing no matter what his view or even if you changed his mind during the debate. Seeing as he is not the one who is making the decisions behind MIR in the fist place and anything he says without conviction would reflect poorly on himself and Canonical.
 
I'm just wondering what is it about mir that people here seem to hate? I've seen people say mir almost does the same as Wayland. If it does why are you hating mir? Why are you hating canocial for making a new choice. I believe mir will come out on top. I don't really know a lot about display servers but its just at least you will have a choice. If you don't like mir then oh well go to Wayland and stop criticizing people who have spent time working on something. Google came in and gave people a choice between iOS and android. Which you see how many people use android. You have a choice for which game console you want ps3, Xbox 360, Wii. You have a choice between which computer os you have. Chrome os, windows, Ubuntu..... Etc. Same applies to display servers. You see Google has surfaceflinger. I believe canocial giving people a choice of a display server is what will put mir on top. I'm still trying to read up on display servers so I can get a full understanding but I have to say none of you know mir more than the people that's working on it so how can you judge something just because its different. 
 
+Quid Fit "However would Mark not be at a disadvantage in your proposed debate as he would would be forced to both respect the privacy of Canonical and represent their stance with mir. "

No. None of the issues that need discussing are relevant to any possible NDAs in play. What needs discussing is the already publicly available code and the already public communication around Mir.

.. and I say that as someone who been under literally dozens of NDAs in just the last few years. (Fun, if irrelevant, trivia: I've been under at least one NDA which involved a project Canonical was involved with.) I know first-hand how those things work and the kinds of things they cover.

But let's say I'm wrong about that .. if Mark said "I can't talk more about <topic> because of a relevant confidentiality agreement .." I'd happily move on with him to other topics.

"I also find it unfair to put him in a position where he would be forced to disagree with you on every standing no matter what his view or even if you changed his mind during the debate."

Why would he be forced to disagree with me?

"Seeing as he is not the one who is making the decisions behind MIR in the fist place"

He pays for Mir development (he is the primary shareholder in Canonical and has funded Canonical to date), Mir is currently a Canonical project, Mir was founded by Canonical and Mark is responsible for the design direction of Ubuntu within Canonical and that includes Mir.

How is he not responsible for the decisions behind Mir?

"anything he says without conviction would reflect poorly on himself and Canonical."

If that is the case, I would suggest he speak with conviction, just as he did in his blog entry.
 
+Matthew Hall thanks for the comments, and two quick thoughts. Firstly, it depends what you mean by Canonical "creating these problems" - I don't think the creation of new technology is a problem, much as some people believe Mir should never exist in the first place.  I agree Canonical has generated conflict in the past, but I am not so sure Canonical is always to blame here.

Secondly, the Mir team didn't intentionally lie about Wayland. The issue was a set of incorrect assumptions on their part; now, they should have had their rationale better made, but I don't think it is fair to accuse them of lying.
 
+jonA than I personally don't think the community has enough info on both Mir and Wayland to make an informed choice of which one is technically better. 

The community hatred is mainly for the two differing standards, and there is a perception in the community that Canonical does suck (I do agree with Mark Shuttleworth there). That is the real issue here, because, even if Mir or wayland isn't adopted community wide, developers will still be flooded by feature requests for Mir/wayland support. 

That's why there should be a proper debate on the matter, so we can resolve this problem now, and focus on the BEST option. Nobody has really given Canonical a "fair trial" in this case, and, as what should be a "open community", they do deserve better.

(Even, I must admit, I have been biased against Canonical in the past). 
 
+Jono Bacon "...it will simply carve another gap between different parts of the Open Source community." I disagree. Sure it could spiral in to a vitriolic debate but I think +Chris Fisher would be the prefect moderator and would steer clear of pettiness.   We all know Mark hasn't done the best in conveying his thoughts in blog form so I could see this as possibly having the opposite out come to your assertion. It could bridge a gap. It is a very real issue in the open source community. Hearing it form the horses mouths I think would be good.  Or we could just have a government shutdown were neither tea parties debate (see what i did there ha) and that i think will carve and only confirm Mark's separation from others who deviate from his goals. 
 By the way... I still like you.... hugs. :-)
 
+Jono Bacon "I don't think the creation of new technology is a problem"

It can be. It can also not be. There is not enough information in the statement "creation of new technology" to determine that. Depending on how it is done and the impact it has on the rest of the ecosystem it exists within, it can be a good thing, a neutral thing or a negative thing.

" I agree Canonical has generated conflict in the past"

Do you consider Mark's blog post in the OP as one of those occasions? If not, why?

"I am not so sure Canonical is always to blame here."

Canonical is not always to blame, and I don't think I've made that statement. I can point to examples where there has been conflict and Canonical has not been to blame, in fact.

Please don't feel the need to defend against that which is not being said.

"the Mir team didn't intentionally lie about Wayland. The issue was a set of incorrect assumptions on their part; now, they should have had their rationale better made, but I don't think it is fair to accuse them of lying."

There are several points worth unpacking in this pair of sentences. This is the sort of topic that would benefit most from a public 'face to face' discussion of matters such that varying experiences and POVs can be shared openly and laid on the table next to each other.

I remain hopeful that Mark will agree to such an engagement.
 
+jonA than  "I'm just wondering what is it about mir that people here seem to hate?"

That question of yours is precisely why I wish to have a public face-to-face with Mark. It would allow us to discuss exactly these kinds of topics in a way that will help people such as yourself understand more clearly what the issues and motivations are on all sides.

Seeing as I've actually answered your question in comments above, and Mark has also tried to get his viewpoint across in print (leading to apparent frustration on his part), I believe that a higher bandwidth discussion that you and anyone else who is interested can observe (and perhaps even participate in via audience submitted questions) would be extremely valuable to everyone.

p.s. I don't hate Mir, and I don't hate Canonical for taking a new direction.
 
I totally agree with +Jono Bacon - with whom, along with guys like +Christopher Halse Rogers, I've had wholly respectful conversations with just within the past month, let alone the past few - at least to the extent that a public debate would be a waste of everyone's time. We've had enough uninformed flamebait (from useless benchmarks to flat-out libel) in public, and I see no reason whatsoever to keep adding to it. What would be the useful end result in terms of the development of either project?

We're focused on building the best window system possible - as we have been for the past few years, through our work on the stack including DRM/KMS, Mesa's EGL, libhybris, xkbcommon and so much technology we share in common - and I'm sure so are the Mir team. Whatever the circumstances, and no matter how much +Mark Shuttleworth insists on poisoning the well and pissing away goodwill (for which he's been quite rightly bollocked by others), I wish them the best of luck.
 
+jonA than I suggest you read this complete thread. It has been iterated a couple of times. This is a choice without benefits.. an unnecessary choice so to speak. It will divide Desktop Linux into two camps. Making life harder for everyone. This not about two different music player.. think of it more as two different kernels.
 
+Daniel Sandman Yeah, I mostly agree with what you write.

The idea of a public, (virtual) 'face to face'  discussion would be to dilute the amount of uninformed flamebait with more usefully accurate information, or at the very least an exposition of the differences in a clear manner. Most of the people who have been involved in the "uninformed flamebait" have simply lacked information.

It's not entirely a technical issue, either. There are questions of the social norms for handling these situations. You talk about poisoning wells and pissing away goodwill .. I'm sure Mark does not see his actions in those terms, and I know many people who would agree with his interpretation of that.

In my experience, when people sit down and talk openly about differences, esp when it involves well-poisoning type scenarios, it's amazing how often new understandings arise as thoughts and motivations are shared in a fresh context.

I do think there is useful improvement to be had from such a public discussion (by which I do not mean text messaging).  I do also understand that not everyone will agree with that. For those people, I'm sure that the idea of a public discussion seems completely futile. I hope we get the opportunity to at least find out.
 
I would like to point out a video/podcast discussion is not a earth shattering thing.  People get interviewed and talk all the time online and in media. I'm just saying...what's the big deal? I think if Mark did agree to do a podcast debate it would show goodwill and show that he is approachable. 
 
+Aaron Seigo Perhaps when Mir matures to the point of being shippable in products (which Wayland has been for quite some time now), it'd be a worthwhile discussion to have. But that isn't now, and there's far too much hype and hysteria around the wholly-invented 'rivalry' to be able to have a productive public discussion anyway.
 
+Frank Forrester If Mark wanted to demonstrate goodwill, he could reply to the email I sent him in March. The Mir development team, and Jono, I have no problem with, but I don't believe Mark has any interest in an adult conversation.
 
+David James I think you didn't quite get my point. I was saying that diversity can be both a good and a bad thing, depending on where it occurs. And in the graphics stack it's an entirely bad thing, there should be exactly one stack. 50.000 text editors are okay, because in the end you actually want to use your computer and for that you should have an application which suits your needs. Which might require different applications for different users.
In the graphics stack that is different, because in the end all users have the same requirement.

Same goes for package management, by the way -- I think the Linux ecosystem would hugely profit from having a standardized packaging system.
 
+Aaron Seigo I have read a large portion of your answers and have to admit your skill at debate is remarkable and quite frankly I am not sure +Mark Shuttleworth would be able to compete with you, though he also seems quite gifted with communication (though admittedly more-so presentation than argument I believe). A debate between the two of you would be historical in terms of ability and no doubt an engaging read. However no matter how hard I try I can't seem to envision a positive outcome to such a debate. I doubt Mark is willing divulge any information that has not already been disclosed nor can I believe that you would be happy without hearing something new (as all you find all current arguments unsatisfactory) or being told that MIR development is unjustified (which will not happen). Since Mark's evey word would be scrutinized he would probably be verbally flogged by those who already agree with you who havn't already found grounds to do so. Again I say it would only lead to a more divided community which I do not belive is your aim it would be a fruitless argument (though enticingly entertaining no doubt).
Personally I don't think there is anything wrong with a company developing a product for their own gain and everyone else's loss but obviously this is not the approach Canonical is trying to take or necessarily thier motivation so I'll but out of this.
 
Sorry proof reading is difficult on a phone
 
Debate on the merits is always good. So is choice.
 
+Aaron Seigo my point is that linux developers should not make public appearances. You are a developer, not a PR person. I am a scientist. Both of us are not the right people to make shows like what you're proposing. Also, there is a reason why Microsoft and Apple do not let their employees talk publically about their work. This goes both ways. Mark overreacts to many things. Martin grasslin overreacts even more. So, at the end both end up hurt. Sad but true.

There is also one more thing. Some of the wayland supporters regularely question not the technical side of mir, but also the political and sociological ones. The only person I can think of right now is Michael Larabel - the creator of phoronix. He runs a Linux news site, he's supposed to be impartial, but in every post about Mir he instigates hatred towards canonial and ubuntu. He has questioned Canonical's potential in bringing mir to life on many occasions even thought the projects is going well.

In other words - leave the politics to the politicians, and the programming to the programmers.
 
+Sven Brauch My point was that Canonical disagree's, and at the end of the day no matter how much we 'debate' this issue Mir and Wayland are going ahead full steam, all we can do now is prepare to pickup the dead if the train runs off the track or celebrate if it gets us to our destinations early.
 
Ubuntu es the new Windows from Bad Company, so i cant under stand why user and Developers work with this Bad OS. Drop the work on all Ubuntu (Kubuntu,etc) and go back to Debian and help a real free OS. 
 
+Daniel Stone, don't you care a tiniest bit for conflict resolution?

You appear negative and distrustful of this opportunity to resolve the issue.  And that is not the kind of issue you can sweep under the rug -- which will be proven to be true again and again.
 
+Naum Rusomarov well I guess we are both quite fair individuals. :) didn't think to apply him to your argument since he volunteered himself.
 
+David James what do you  mean by "linux split in two (again)"? would you mind giving some references on what you're talking about? thanks :)
 
Why would anyone have to care really? Ubuntu team is doing their thing with Mir and that's perfectly acceptable. People are paid from Canonical to write open source code on that project. Give them a break. I disagree about criticising Mir when it hasn't shown its true potential yet. You may call it unworthy when it's put in use somewhere. Review it, potentially say it's crap. But don't call shit on a company that tries their own thing just because "we don't need it". No one forces you to use it/develop your apps in it. If it becomes mainstream, your accusations will be wrong. Don't try to shit on (possible) innovation just like that.

That being said, I disagree with saying that there are political reasons for saying that Mir is unnecessary. You don't need to be an X/Wayland developer to call shit about it. We still haven't seen anything revolutionary about it so it's quite possible you'll have people say it's crap. And maybe it is at that point. But please stop giving a fuck.
 
I see marks comment as a reaction to the "We do not condone or support Canonical in the course of action they have chosen, and will not carry XMir patches upstream. 
-The Management"  What's to debate? Thats a purely political justification for their actions. Calling mark out for debate is pointless and you are simply fuelling the fire. 
 
+Jono Bacon:  Did anyone even consider switching to the Wayland protocol(if you insist on keeping the compositor code)? You seem to agree that beyond the point of their suspicions about wayland being rendered unnecessary, they didn't have any reason to avoid it.

I would assume that's still an option, and one deliberately unexplored.
It's not that I want to call this purely intentional, but you have to at least be honest about your reasons. The toolkits you are working on porting already support Wayland, and have for months. In my brushes with Canonical employees here, I'm noticing it's lowering their respect for the rest of the organization, I can't imagine it being a good business choice.
 
+Aaron Hamilton "Did anyone even consider switching to the Wayland protocol"

That would greatly, greatly improve the situation.

On the Mir wiki under "why not Wayland", they wrote that Wayland is a protocol so they are aware of that .. but they reject it for what do not look like valid reasons to me. (Earlier drafts were even worse, so maybe I should see that as progress.)
 
+damien duncan and +Kostis Karantias  I have explain numerous times in this thread why public discussion is useful and necessary. Please do read what has been written before offering advice.
 
+Naum Rusomarov I not only run a business with employees (and have done so several times over the last 20 years), I've been a technical and organizational spokesperson for a number of organizations over the years and routinely deal with corporate and governmental organizations of various scales in non-technical capacities.

I keep my technical interests facing forward more than these other aspects in places such as this because, in the context of Free software, that is more important to me.

So my suggestion is this: let's assume less about each other and instead focus on addressing the issues. Fair enough?
 
+Aaron Seigo the point is ubuntu used open/free Software and give a user a feeling "hey we are good why we you give a free operation system ..." but behind this is not open or free its a other bad company he think we are good and make cool stuff. Sometimes i think Mark thinking he have spirit like Apple founder! Mark is only a man with money not more. He have no vision or other. Fazit: fuckoff ubuntu and go back to work, wayland are on the way, xorg too in the next 10 years we habe faster and smaler hardware bigger display  8K and up. The GUI are cleaning and more Data like soundfiles and videofiles etc. Less is more and the Hardware manufactions give us the way. The only innovation is "how and waht can we make with software, mke money? is not the good way. Respekt the user and giv he Software he can make innovations Data (games, videos, sounds, docs, etc) 
 
+David James
There is nothing wrong with 4000 music players. Only a few are competitors. All the rest was probably written as a private project of students, hobbyists, ...
Same counts for other USER-applications.

Having three packet formats is peanuts compared to the disruptive nature of having to support several display servers.
The first has nothing to do with the coding. Lots of developers are releasing there code as just tarballs and leave it to the package developers of the distro's to mould it in their package format.
Besides, there are tools to convert all of them.
Compare this to supporting several display servers as was explained by Martin and Aaron.

Some years ago when Linux was discovered by the big IT companies, they recognized the danger of fragmentation at the core level.
Unix was fresh in their minds. So they decided there was a need for a Linux-standard. The LSB was born.
Redhat and Novell were direct competitors but were adhering to the LSB and contributing big to the whole ecosystem. At a point, 40-45% of the paches to the Linux kernel came from paid developers of these two companies.
They were fighting on the same level and with the same weapons.

Now Canonical comes to the show and the risk of fragmentation is higher than ever before.
Some people say, let the code decide which comes on top, which is very naive. This code is at the lower part of the graphics stack. All the code above is affected by this.
Let's say Mir comes on top about code quality, features, ... and all the projects above the display server adopts their code base.
What do we have then?
Canonical in complete control of the graphics stack because of the CLA.
Yes, the code is GPLv3 and can be forked, but this is a big difference  to other companies which will have to adhere to the GPL while Canonical can do whatever it wants with an option to go proprietary.

I hope I'm not alone by seeing the intended isolation of Canonical as a danger.
 
In one of the comments to his blog, +Mark Shuttleworth is seen writing this:

"Mir’s reason for existence is that I see Wayland ending up with the same set of problems that X had– it promises that everyone can get what they want, which just leaves everyone slightly incompatible with everyone else"

I would be very interested in an actual explanation of this. Because otherwise, it remains another example of him spreading FUD.
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner
Mark could as well have said 'I was told by a gipsy who saw this future of Wayland in a crystal ball'.

That quote is just a confirmation that Canonical wants complete control.
 
+Samium Gromoff The Wayland and Mir development teams aren't in conflict. The only conflict is Mark consistently flinging shit, and I have no interest in engaging him in, and rewarding him for, childish nonsense.
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner Is it? Genuinely not sure if that's true let's say your a manufacturer and your going to ship Ubuntu touch and your device starts an annoying screen flicker, Canonicals response obviously needs to be we will fix this in this case does it matter whether Ubuntu is using Wayland or MIR how easy is it to patch Wayland?
 
+Christian Parpart Think of the fact that to download a linux program you have to choose deb or rpm format. (or .tar.gz if the person can't be bothered going through the world of pain that is packaging.)

There is also the GTK vs QT toolkits, a battle that dominated the linux desktop for years.

KDE vs Gnome, I like how a program designed for KDE or GTK can look like complete arse on each others platform, no package manager is compatible with another, I can't install a program on one computer, and have it automatically install on another computer, ala android.

Linux has been split and subdivided so many times it's really laughable to go, NOW STAOP. OK STAP. Here is where we draw the line! Nope. The line was crossed back when the linux world thought 2 toolkits, 10 desktop environments, incompatible packaging formats, a lack of unified app installation, etc etc was cool.

+Gunter Schelfhout "Lots of developers are releasing there code as just tarballs and leave it to the package developers"

THAT'S A HUGE PROBLEM! If the few developers who write apps for your platform are saying 'I don't care which distro my app gets into, and I don't care who uses it or how many versions behind my software gets', you're not going to get very many people writing apps, or the type of people you want writing apps.

And yeah, your second part is a symptom of what I was saying earlier:

"The argument has shifted from a technical perspective Mir vs Wayland, to a political one, why does Canonical/Ubuntu have the ability to make crap software and push that onto the linux community?"
 
+David James Actually, as a developer, choose a reasonable build system, don't make it a moving target or swap it once in a while, choose the one and only reasonable package format tar.{gz|bz2|xz} and the distro packagers will be happy with your product should it be worth an addition. It is amazing how simple a Gentoo ebuild for a package can be that triggers everything from download to installation. And anyway, downstream chooses the package management, it naturally has to deal with its implications. This is not in the same ball park as a 2nd display server/protocol. It's not the same league, it's not even a similar game.
 
+David James
RPM and dpkg were developed around the same time (1994).
Years later when the larger community and industry recognized the need for a standard of the code base (LSB), this standard settled on RPM.
If you think Linux is divided, you can always ask Debian and Canonical to adhere to the standard.

Canonical is deviating more and more from the LSB and other efforts to keep the code base compatible.
 
People seem to be underestimating the current state of Wayland (I have seen multiple comments about how it's not production ready and not shipped anywhere, and only recently picked up development because of the "Mir threat"). While that may be true on the desktop, it's not on the embedded market, where Wayland is in use in various products already and has been for a while. Heck, I've been working on a Wayland-based device already in 2011, even though that particular device never made it onto the shelves. And we had a working display stack including touch input based on Wayland in 2011.

So, no, it also wasn't the perceived competition with Mir that made Wayland "restart development" or anything. It's been making progress and increasing adoption over the past couple years already. And I'm rather sure that even if Ubuntu will regain the popularity it once had, that won't kill off Wayland or even endanger its development. The desktop distribution market is tiny compared to the market of Linux-based embedded devices, and this market also happens to be the one where we won't see any GPLv3 software in the foreseeable future.
 
+Manuel Nickschas That is precisely why I want to see public, face-to-face discussion on this matter.

There is so much information spread by the guerrilla communication tactics being employed. People are saying things and writing things without sufficient context or citation which others then pick up and repeat as truth.
 
Canonical is Mark Shuttleworth's business as his finances underpin the company.   However, I know he does not make decisions in a vacuum and has alot of very talented Engineers/Developers providing their insights into future directions for Ubuntu.

Also, Ubuntu unlike almost all other Linux Distributions has a defined a target for the future of Ubuntu that they want to include Desktop, Server, Cloud, TV, Tablet and SmartPhone.      

All of those target's require some cohesion in the direction of  the development of Ubuntu or they would end up with a nightmare of incompatibilities btwn desktop/server, phone, TV, Tablet etc which would make serviceability/support a nightmare.

Rather than bitch and complain about what they do why don't people get off their high-horse and just accept that Ubuntu has set a direction for itself and that it is different in some areas than what Red Hat or Arch etc may be doing.    That does NOT make it wrong.... just a different engineering decision that, who knows, may lead to goodness in some areas.    

Its what Open Source is all about.    If you don't like Unity, run Gnome, LXDE, Mate or whatever.   If you don't like MIR... use a different Distro.  

No one is preventing anyone from having Choices!

The marketplace & the users will determine whether MIR is a success or not and 5 years from now all of these diatribes will be answered one way or another.
 
+brian mullan I have answered precisely your line of critique in earlier comments in this thread.

Before you write long missives in which you attempt to tell others what to do, I would ask that you read what has already been written, consider it, digest it and then engage. Constructive conversation is impossible otherwise. I'm not going to repeat myself over and over again, and you should not need to repeat what has already been said and responded to in this very thread.
 
+Gunter Schelfhout "I hope I'm not alone by seeing the intended isolation of Canonical as a danger."

This sits at the core of my concerns.
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner +Gunter Schelfhout You don't get it.

I don't want your advice. I'm pointing out a major linux issue. None of this gentoo ebuilds will do this! and suse open build service has this! and then some random volunteer from Estonia will happily package your program for you! and maybe they'll even package your updates! or maybe not! And if you want to put out an update then you're screwed because the entire distro has to be version reved before it will appear! 

No.

It should be, I decide I want my program to install on linux, I package it EASILY and ONCE, I make it available across all distros, and when I want to put out an update, I can do it straight away. Welcome to 2007.

Having jack all apps on linux in the day and age when having apps are key to your products success is what makes me question why I'm even explaining this?! 

Anyway lets get back to arguing about display servers. Mir vs Wayland! Gah!
 
+David James I wasn't giving you advice. ;) You can never package your program once and for all distros, simply because there are n distros with differences that go beyond mere packaging customs. The simple fact that there still is a plethora of successful apps across a gazillion different distros negates your argument (that could only be solved by having just one distro in the first place): yes, the developers need not care about specific distro packaging as long as they make the packagers' jobs easy. Just so you know how easy it is for me to manually get a brand new program update from an existing Gentoo ebuild (not caring for any new dependencies): I rename one file, re-manifest it, and any step from then on (download, configure, build, test, sandboxed install, merge) is done automatically for me. When ordinary users are capable of that, you can imagine how fast downstream will pick up your precious update. That is how easy it can be as long as upstream projects take care of their build systems and provide proper changelogs.

So this is a non-issue compared to the trouble that is going to be caused by fragmentation in the display server space.
 
+Andreas Sturmlechner "the simple fact that there still is a plethora of successful apps" hahahaha! You are joking right?

There are more apps in the iphone store after 4 months in 2007 than there are on linux in all 20 years combined. But please don't worry, this is not an issue, lets get back to Mir vs Wayland.
 
+David James The plain number of applications is an idiotic measure for just about anything and you must know that because it's really obvious. So why do you even mention it?
 
+David James Strange, for all the hundreds of thousands of apps I could find in the Android store I don't miss any of them on my computer. Regardless, your comparison is quite a stretch to say the least, it is wrong on so many levels that I won't even start to tear them apart.
 
+Sven Brauch Because your application base is the difference between a Black Berry and an iOS, a windows and an OS/2 warp.

An OS with a 1% market share vs ..

And now +Andreas Sturmlechner thinks this is about having Android applications in linux. You guys don't get it, go back to arguing about Mir vs Wayland.
 
+David James Of course the spectrum of applications available is very important but counting the applications is not a useful way to characterize it.
 
A public face-to-face discussion is not going to solve anything. It will merely serve as a forum to spread more disinformation and as Jono said, entrench both sides more. It would probably be good theatre though. That might be its legacy -- theatrically presented flaming framed by incomprehensible technobabble.

Both sides in the Canonical vs. Linux conflict should stop sniping and instead say good things about each other, or nothing at all.
 
So can we all agree that "the dash" is a keylogger now?
 
Please stop doing flamewars about random things. The point is simple: Canonical does a controversal thing -- which annoys many developers, but is okay by itself. However they then blame the annoyed developers for not investing work into supporting their stuff, which is completely idiotic. You just can't do that.
Including other points which you like or dislike about what Canoical does into this discussion is not a good idea since it just dilutes the more important point.
 
I kinda hated when KDE users who are commenting against ubuntu unity, gnome and ubuntu in general on sites like Webup8d and OMGubuntu. Thanks to Aarons negative post like this. I can confirm that KDE folks indeed hate unity, ubuntu and everything canonical. Seriously, if KDE needs to flame gnome, ubuntu, unity and canonical for it's success, then it is failed product in my eyes. You need public approval and debate for proving your side right? Sounds like religion. Shuttleworth was not wrong calling KDE users "tea party" in that case. Just saying. 
 
+Mahesh Kay Well it seems to be a hot topic, no? At least for Mark, who brought it all up again by himself - would you be so kind as to complain on his blog instead?
 
"the point is simple: Canonical does a controversal thing -- which annoys many developers, but is okay by itself. However they then blame the annoyed developers for not investing work into supporting their stuff, which is completely idiotic"

That's the linux community (tm) version.

From what I can see, the Canonical storyline is:

Canonical makes a new display server
Submits a patch to Intel
Intel devs reject patch due to '- The Management'
Canonical see this as politics, not technical reasons.
Mark blames politics and uses analogy to real life politics
Linux Community upset at Mark.
 
+Mahesh Kay Those people are idiots and they exist in every community. The same thing happens the other way around, too.
That is also not what this discussion is about.

+David James I'm not sure what you want to tell us. Yes, that's sort of what happened, except that Canonical keeps insisting that this is only "politics" while numerous people have named lots of technical reasons for their actions. Those technical reasons are, from my point of view, very comprehensible.
 
In fact.. the only thing "politic" seems to be the creation of Mir. That or it was an accident.
 
Hahaha, Mark S sure did step on a few toes there, didn't he :D Suggestion: Stop feeling so god damn "offended" and get on with your lifes, and keep coding high quality open source stuff. Let either solution speak for itself.
 
+Niklas Andersson: Well, it just means I will not be recommending them to customers because they make irresponsible decisions on pride, or hide their reasons assuming they even exist.


The reasons I respond may involve personal pride, but their liasons with various projects I consume and contribute to also affect my experiences outside of their product sphere; the toolkits I use may build larger than before because they accommodate their display server, I have to work with upstart scripts just for their one distribution(with no good reviewed technical reason for them sticking with it), etc..

I don't think people are just offended by the statements, the actions these statements are attempting to legitimize are damaging and unnecessary, that's why people are hot under the collar.
 
+Aaron Seigo 

I don't think that's a good idea. Video debate is entertaining but always distracting. It's more important to lay down facts in articles than look handsome in realtime conversation.

We're not electing president. We all want to see Linux goes a reasonable way. Let's just keep them as blog post war instead of realtime argument show.
 
+Koala Yeung I would invite you to examine recent history and reconsider your position.

The people involved have a tendency, as can be seen in Mark's blog posting linked in the OP, to not engage in direct, accurate and honest communication when it is left to text.

The "write good articles" approach only works if those involved write good articles and that such articles are kept in the context of each other in front of the same audience.

We we actually see is people not engaging the actual issues, erecting strawmen, pointing fingers, tossing insults and writing fictions in the hope people will believe them as truths.

These nuggets of injustice are then hosted on individual blog rolls or in personal social media feeds. Too many people (through no fault of their own) only see one half the conversation.

These negative trends and tactics all rely on the unique aspect of modern textual discussion: there is no back-and-forth and no agreed upon contextual background. Put another way, there is no editorial board.

Broadcast face-to-face discussion resolves these sorts of issues.

Since you brought up electing the president, let me add that just because politicians suck at face to face discussions does not mean that others don't. The Internet is full of such panel discussions that are truly insightful and useful, and I have attended several in person over the years in which I have personally reaped much value.

At the end of the day, I'm asking for an adult level conversation that others can view and perhaps even participate in via a Q/A period.

It is alarming that some people, apparently such as yourself, do not see value in that.
 
+Aaron Seigo I agree that the recent blog post of +Mark Shuttleworth  is erecting strawmen, pointless and outrageous. But I'm still not convinced that live face-to-face debate a good approach to any resolution. Even when you put together an broadcasted face-to-face discussion, there still is no editorial board of any sort.

I don't see any additional value of such broadcast to the discussion in a broader scope. Especially when I don't think enough people would take his blog post seriously.

Maybe you're right about the "experience" aspect of my opinion. Since I haven't seen any good results in any public face-to-face discussion, I'd stay skeptical to this approach.

I'd try to follow this up with an open mind.
 
In my opinion most here have too little understanding of how humans actually make decisions, and how they after the fact represent how the decisions are made.

1. Mark is boss of a company, and team managers report to him. They reported issues with Wayland, they thought them over, they suggested an alternative approach, Mir, Mark approved. Mark now defends this, even though the reported issues with Wayland were mostly false (which they acknowledged). Seems all very common stuff.

2. Control. We are all OSS developers, we know how it works. We have a pet feature, it gets coded by us, the project manager, does it even go to review? After all, we review others code, but ok, if it gets a review period, or was discussed on a mailing list, surely we call the shots. With call the shots I mean, it takes more effort to change our perception, then the other way around.
Cananical has seen this in progress in many projects they wanted to influence. They have not been able to influence these projects, or at least not in the time frame they need responses! This sets them up towards creating their own projects with full control. Seems all very logical

3. Speed of execution. We have to agree that Canonical works with some deadlines that free OSS developers don't have a lot of experience with, but is common in companies. Discussing in mailing list just is way to slow. This is a problem, I myself regularly disappear days from mailing lists.
You cannot set an agenda for a OSS project you don't control, but you have the requirement to work towards your deadlines. Here Ubuntu Phone.
This gives a big push for your own project. Again logical

4. Even though above will have been the correct reasons for Canonical, the way humans represent why they took a decision will not align with this. Be it ego, shame or too little time, things will be explained in a way to put them forward favorable, read: technically better.
This discussion, and others are all water under the bridge. Just accept 1,2,3 are the reasons and move on, stop with asking people about things said in 4, it does not help. Respect that canonical is a company so can do this, likes control so as to set the agenda, and needs speed of execution.

Some personal comments.
a. Personally I would have like it better if they forked wayland to add the pieces they wanted. However, this is not that much better for the users of the stack. For canonical it would have the big disadvantage that the future would probably look the same anyway: two separate products, and their engineers would need to work with a technology they might want to change more dramatically from the start.
Please think about the webkit fork of google here! Think also about the linux fork with wakelocks of google android. This last has been reintegrated.  I just want to indicate that this behavior of companies is typical, not something limited to canonical

b. Canonical works on the display server tech for ubuntu phone, so they have the same problems as google with webkit for chrome. Indeed, to quote google: “ "management asked a lot of hard questions” about this move, but in the end, the decision was made in order to reduce the technical complexity of evolving Google’s rendering engine in the direction the team wanted to go in."
For canonical the display server was the piece they needed to work on, so they took the Mir decision, making the argument that a display server cannot be compared to a packaging system or html rendering engine moot from the point of view of the company.

c. The argument of Mir being downstream is somewhat funny to read with respect to kwin. If you google around for 'unity on arch' or 'unity or mint' you will see quite some people trying and succeeding. When Mir is a reality, Ubuntu 14.04 (?), running Kubuntu without Mir will not be something Kubunty users will be helped by. Using the Ubuntu forums to solve low lying problems will suddenly be that much harder.

Finally, my look in the glass orb: if Ubuntu succeeds to ship Mir in 14.04, then it will be with us for a long time. Otherwise, meh. As somebody else wrote, from the outside, it does seem Wayland development suddenly went a lot faster :-)
 
+Benny Malengier Resolving the sort of misinformation seen in your posting is precisely why I wish to have a public discussion on the matter.

I agree with you that points 1-3 are quite likely the real reasons Canonical elected to go the Mir route. I am personally just fine with that.

What I am not comfortable with is when it is justified externally in terms of technical reasons (or other misinformation) how others then take and repeat that information and even use it themselves to make decisions. If Canonical only informed Canonical's decision making, it would be a completely moot discussion. However, Canonical informs the decision making of others as well, and that is why their misinformation can not be allowed to remain floating about ignored.

So .. moving from the your numbered points to your lettered points:

a) Forking Wayland

"For canonical it would have the big disadvantage that the future would probably look the same anyway: two separate products, and their engineers would need to work with a technology they might want to change more dramatically from the start."

It turns out that all the features they wanted could be added to Wayland in a compatible fashion. They could have forked, or created a branch to be even more social, and worked on their needs there.

Wayland's protocol was finalized and marked stable almost exactly a year ago today, so there is no "Wayland was still moving" excuse.

"Please think about the webkit fork of google here! Think also about the linux fork with wakelocks of google android."

Ok, let's think of them. Webkit was originally a fork of KHTML that a company went off and developed in private on for over a year. (Not the best way to do it ..) After bringing it back into the open, many patches were re-integrated back into KHTML, eventually everyone just moves to Webkit.

Blink by Google is a fork of Webkit for justifiable reasons, and done so in the public eye. What happened? Most have moved along to Blink. These are decisions being made within the webkit community, which is why it is so importantly different.

Wakelocks are a horrible example. Not only did Android continue to use the Linux kernel, but they did eventually get merged back. So it does work.

b. "For canonical the display server was the piece they needed to work on,"

No, it wasn't. They needed to work on the application layer, for which a display server is necessary. Wayland was available and would have sufficed perfectly.

Now, they may choose to work on the display server, that's find. However, they did not need to.

You know what I'm concerned about with this kind of idea floating about? Same thing I was with Unity: that others would follow suit and fork their own thing. After Unity, the idea of the a distro with its own in-house desktop was accepted as 'normal' and we start seeing Cinnamon, MATE, SolusOS .. The last thing we need is the idea that "if you are working on a device OS platform, you probably should also look at writing your own display server".

c. "When Mir is a reality, Ubuntu 14.04 (?), running Kubuntu without Mir will not be something Kubunty users will be helped by. Using the Ubuntu forums to solve low lying problems will suddenly be that much harder."

That is a problem caused by Canonical, not one upstream projects can fix in a reasonable fashion. If every downstream creates its own display server, upstream stands zero chance of delivering something stable and well maintained.

So let's go back to what you wrote earlier in your comment:

"This discussion, and others are all water under the bridge"

No, because there are implications for the users of Ubuntu and its derivatives that they ought to be made aware of.

This is why I wish to ensure the topic is held up in the sunlight rather than ignored.

By the way, am I correct in assuming you don't work on display servers, desktop shells or application platforms? It is an assumption on my part, which is why I'm asking .. but the kind of analysis you're making sounds like the sort made by those who aren't intimately involved in the area.

.. which would again lead back to my request for discussion among those who are so that we can have quality discussions rather than an ever amplified echo of misinformation.
 
+Mahesh Kay "Thanks to Aarons negative post like this. I can confirm that KDE folks indeed hate unity, ubuntu and everything canonical."

You may confirm that in your own mind, but you are wrong.

"Seriously, if KDE needs to flame gnome, ubuntu, unity and canonical for it's success,"

This has nothing to do with success. I am not a jealous person or that shallow of a human.
 
"You need public approval and debate for proving your side right? "

No, I wish the topic to be made public so that others may benefit from truth. When someone spreads misinformation and sets a horrible example for how to interact within the Free software community, as Canonical and Mark have done here with Mir, it needs addressing to preserve the health and good functioning of the ecosystem.

I hope that helps you understand my motivations and expectations a bit more.
 
+Aaron Seigo  A public debate is good, but the format of a live debate would be a poor choice. Especially if the topic is as controversial as Mir vs. Wayland.

During a live debate, one side can make false statements to support their view much faster than the other side can debunk them. This has been especially apparent when evolution biologists debate creationists, or when climate scientists debate AGW denialists (funny that the Tea Party example fits here).

A formal written debate could make more sense. First decide on a specific claim or question, then have three rounds of debate each a week apart (example, first round: opening statements; second round: response to opponent's opening statements and presenting of more arguments; third round: response to opponent's second round statements and conclusion. No new arguments may be introduced in round three).
 
+Koala Yeung "Even when you put together an broadcasted face-to-face discussion, there still is no editorial board of any sort."

Having it on an existing (and Ubuntu-friendly, at that) show such as the Linux Action Show, the hosts would provide editorial input and conversation moderation; secondly, by having both POV expressed in the same context, there is an equivalent result to having an editorial board in print, one of whose duties is to bring together related content.

"I don't see any additional value of such broadcast to the discussion in a broader scope. Especially when I don't think enough people would take his blog post seriously"

Firstly, it is not just this one blog post. It is the manner in which the entire Mir situation has been handled, of which the blog post is just the proverbial "final straw". That pattern will be emulated by both Canonical in future and others outside of Canonical if it proves to be efficacious.

Secondly, there are people who have commented in this very thread who apparently have taken that one blog entry quite seriously and as desktop developers we get exposed to such people on a regular basis who take the misinformation and destructive approaches taken by Mark and others within Canonical as examples to emulate.
 
+Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn "but the format of a live debate would be a poor choice."

No format was suggested. Only the medium. 

If Mark is to accept the invitation, then we would decide together on the format.

"A formal written debate could make more sense."

I've already covered why I have no faith left in a written format for this discussion, so I won't repeat it here.

As you mentioned climate change denial, a good example of what can happen with a written debate was seen on wattsup the other year: a written debate was scheduled, started and then unceremoniously suspended and dismantled.

I'd much rather a civil conversation.

I've been involved in such engagements before, so I'm not speaking from complete ignorance here :)
 
+Aaron Seigo
"By the way, am I correct in assuming you don't work on display servers, desktop shells or application platforms?"
Yes, application development here. Us normal mortals want to understand how things work too though :-)
Your reply clears up things that were unclear still, thanks.

Personally, I think it would be better to make a KDE Press release with a KDE point of view and content like in your reply (no 'shame on you Mark' stuff ;-) ). Same like Intel did. It  gives clarity.

As to KDE on ubuntu, what should those many users do? Does KDE/Kubuntu offer them a path forward after 14.04? Will Gubuntu/Kubuntu/Lubuntu make Wayland usuable on Ubuntu, or will they be stuck with some Xorg, or will Blue systems pay for a patch of kwin against mir, or closer to Debian, ...
Those are the things that actually worry me and for which I hope some have answers soon.
 
+Benny Malengier "Your reply clears up things that were unclear "

That's all I hope to do :)

"Personally, I think it would be better to make a KDE Press release with a KDE point of view"

KDE, along with GNOME, Englightement, Hawaii and others are speaking with their technical actions. I don't think it is wise to take those technical communities and start asking them to take public stances against companies that produce Free software.

"As to KDE on ubuntu, what should those many users do? Does KDE/Kubuntu offer them a path forward after 14.04?"

I can't answer that authoritatively; the  Kubuntu team could however:

http://blogs.kde.org/2013/06/26/kubuntu-wont-be-switching-mir-or-xmir

So what they've said thus far is that they will stick with what works with the upstream software. If that means Wayland in the future, that's where they'll go.

The future is always open to change, but that's the current set of understandings.
 
+Tuomas Ahola Why every FOSS project must be community driven? Is there something wrong on having a vision an try to materialize it through free software? If the community model worked in the past it can't be changed for the timing of the mobile era? Why everyone who tries to implement their own product without the community is an heretic?
 
+Gustavo Saramago Because of what they did to produce said product. Surely it is fine to write code, for profit, and for themselves. No one is harping on Valve for releasing software for Linux, even though it's profit driven and independently developed, right? The problem here is that they took existing code, forked it, and made something wholly incompatible with everything else. Not just that, they deliberately spat on the other developers. If you were said developer, would you appreciate this kind of behavior?

If you are insistent on your particular POV, then there's an explanation for that, too. It's totally OK to go off on your own. But if you don't have any support (or even have some hostility), you will eventually die. In this case, the anger may be enough to garner resistance everywhere, including developers of libraries Ubuntu depends on. If they withdraw support, Canonical is going to meet a certain death. They might have enough devs and money for their operations now, but I'm sure they don't have enough for maintaining low-level libraries that they might be forced to maintain in the future.
Wei Wei
 
Looking forward to it
 
+Albert Huang - Albert - I was sad to read your comment - but I'm not sure how Canonical 'spat' on developers (seriously, I don't grok this perspective - please enlighten me)?
 
+Bhasker Pandya I think it would be good if you read the gigantic discussion above your comment. Answering your question would lead to repeating a lot of points already discussed above. :)
 
+Bhasker Pandya  To make a long story short: Canonical spread Fear/Uncertainty/Doubt against Wayland and burned their bridges doing it. Canonical is arguing the politics and the community is arguing the technicality.

Meanwhile nobody is building new bridges and Canonical is still waving the torch around burning things.
 
Penguins supposed to be live in the community. Helping each other even though some of it have different oppinion. Just feeling sad for bickering pengs.
 
outstanding Free software videocasts?

i presume this was sarcasm aseigo..
rarely will you find a podcast that has shit on free software, gnu, fsf, etc....

there are many fine floss shows, the only one worse that the ne you suggest serves floss is randall Schwartz ....

Add a comment...