It’s sad to see the incredible lack of common sense with the open sourcing of software. I would like to see the entire package released. Of course it all comes in due time. Preferably after others understand how Open Source actually works. It really bothers me to see how some people think everything everyone does should be open sourced (essentially) just because they say so.

Mark: You’ve always been a very approachable guy and I’d like to post my gratitude toward everything you’ve brought together. You’ve generated an extremely outstanding community which is perhaps 90% of the reason I have never stayed away from Ubuntu for long.

I have nothing to add to the substance of this discussion, other than what we’ve already said previously. But I do want to make it very clear that no one from Canonical said anyone should “vote with their feet”. We publish other people’s comments, but we are not responsible for them!

Thanks,
-Karl

I also think that it is contradictory for Ubuntu to simultaneously tout the benefits of Free / Open-Source Software, and internally use closed-source development tools. If FOSS is so good, then why aren’t they using it? If licensing software as Free / Open-Source is for everyone’s mutual benefit, then why aren’t they doing so? And if it’s not, then why are they pushing FOSS on us?

I don’t think that it’s zealotry to point out this contradiction, especially as someone who loves the Ubuntu community and who wants to see it thrive. It may be zealotry to only use Free / Open-Source anything, but it could also be principled … or even practical. It could be a means of avoiding lock-in, or even just a way to get involved with a project you love, as Jef pointed out. At any rate, Ubuntu is a Free / Open-Source Software project, and that’s one of the things that a lot of community members like about it. So why can’t the tools be licensed as well? Why aren’t they today, and why weren’t they to begin with?

I congratulate Mr. Shuttleworth on the open-sourcing of Launchpad. I just get the feeling that he doesn’t “get” why Free / Open-Source Software is so important, and is only opening things up enough to be perceived as being open. And I could be mistaken, but I feel like he is taking advantage of our community spirit, and of the goodwill associated with the Ubuntu name and with Free / Open-Source Software in general. And the Ubuntu One debate going on today only helps to underscore these feelings that I and others have.

I’m not sure that I like that. And I don’t like that people who raise honest doubts are being told to “vote with their feet,” or being accused of zealotry. It’s not consistent with the spirit of Ubuntu, or with the Ubuntu ethos, to dismiss people out of hand like that. Just like keeping Ubuntu One and parts of Launchpad closed-source is not consistent with cultivating an open and friendly community around a Free / Open-Source Software project.

Thank you very much

For any serious advocate of change…is eventually ever soon enough? Surely Shuttleworth isn’t content about seeing all the changes he wants to see in things like UI development happen…eventually..or see upstream project releases syncing…eventually. In the same way, I am ill-contented to see corporate entities embrace open development..eventually. Especially corporate entities who spend a lot of time talking about the benefits of open development to others. Canonical is one of those corporate entities.

But don’t fret, as soon as there are no more press stories about Launchpad becoming open, I’ll have far fewer opportunities to get on my soapbox. The more you talk about it before it happens, the more chances I get to talk about what the implications are that soyuz isn’t being opened. We’ll all be able to move on with our lives once this has no significant PR or marketing angle to leverage.

It doesn’t really matter what I believe. I an absolutely and fundamentally unimportant. As an employee of Canonical do you believe that the open development process produces better results than a closed development process? Do you believe in that strongly enough advocate for the opening of Soyuz for community contributor development to empower the Ubuntu contributors to make the Ubuntu better ? Would you for example stick your next out and sign an Ubuntu community petition extolling the benefits of opening up soyuz.. as a much more polite way to advocate for that change?

Would you agree that Ubuntu is openly developed even those Soyuz, which is critical to releasing Ubuntu, is not open for contribution without special permission? Yes Ubuntu is a collection of open source software…so is Xandros. Yes Ubuntu is built using a community process. But that process is not fundamentally an open one…not until Soyuz is open…or Ubuntu contributors are free to develop and use an open codebase with duplicates what Soyuz does as part of the Ubuntu release process.

By the way, can you tell me which Launchpad components are required to make the Ubuntu PPA feature work? Is Soyuz among them?

-jef

You make a fine example of how uncivilized, unrespectful, and outrageously demanding linux users can be. It really makes someone’s day to waste their time servicing such a person.

Well, if what you say is true, Canonical will eventually realize it. IOW, if you really believe your argument, then you won’t need to “hammer away”, because you can be confident that reality will do it for you. ‘Nuff said .

-Karl

Infrastructure pieces can be challenging to open up, especially ones that you rely on for doing business – what to speak of ones that give you a (perceived) advantage if they remain proprietary. It was good to see Red Hat release Spacewalk, in a similar vein.

Looking forward to more of the same

I am with you to a point. Free and open is wonderful. However, the fundamentalist fury with which you are pushing your ideals is counterproductive and only serves to make people (me included) want to separate themselves from your arrogant and rude attitude.

You have stated your case. The project leaders disagree with you. Now it is time to vote with your feet. Walk away. You will be happier, and others will, too.

This isn’t a civil rights issue like Apartheid or racial segregation in the 1960s American South or Gandhi-era India. This is a political opinion-driven issue. You still have your freedom to use what you prefer. Let others have theirs.