News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Red Hat, Canonical and GNOME Contributions.

Re:Red Hat, Canonical and GNOME Contributions by leif on Friday July 30, 2010 @03:50AM (#1560517)
To be fair, citing upstart, launchpad, and bazaar as "upstream" is pretty disingenuous.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Red Hat, Canonical and GNOME Contributions by tuxychandru on Friday July 30, 2010 @04:31AM (#1560572)
Why can't upstart and bazaar be called upstream? Fedora has used upstart and bazaar is in use outside Ubuntu and Launchpad.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Red Hat, Canonical and GNOME Contributions by leif on Saturday July 31, 2010 @12:30AM (#1563225)
Because they were started by, and are still mostly (unless I'm gravely mistaken) developed only by the same people that develop for Ubuntu. If they were more autonomous, I'd be more willing to consider them "upstream".
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Red Hat, Canonical and GNOME Contributions by balac on Friday July 30, 2010 @05:18AM (#1560623)
they don't relate the the core technologies (kernal & GNOME) being discussed.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Red Hat, Canonical and GNOME Contributions by mgunes on Friday July 30, 2010 @06:42AM (#1560702)
It might have been, in your sense, had he included them in the list of GNOME-related components:

> The above list also doesn’t include significant upstream investment in other areas such as Upstart, Bazaar, Launchpad, and a full team building Ubuntu.

[ Parent | on HN ]