People here does not understand one big thing: conflict of interests and goals. If GNOME wants some design and Canonical wants different design then they simply cannot work on the same project. The same thing with Wayland - constant patching to make it usable in Ubuntu would be a huge waste of time. Porting changes(like reusing Android drivers) to newer versions would be pretty painful and sluggish. Just like overlay scrollbars, appmenu and various other things. If you need to change core functionality then your code won't be accepted by upstream. And you end up with ugly, patched code and partly implemented design. And that's what Unity is today. If they want robust, stable, efficient and beautiful desktop, they need to "reinvent the wheel". Just like Apple did, with the difference that they are doing it OpenSource.
the only thing i will say about Gnome vs. Canonical - is that (generally speaking) Gnome's projects are much more essential than any code Canonical puts out. (Hell, Ubuntu/Unity is built on Gnome, for fcsk sake! ...and while i do use _some_ of the gnome stack, i'm not a Gnome-Shell user, nor a hardcore gnome fanboy.
anyway, you are delusional to think (and vocalize) such silly notions.
You don't get it, do you? Canonical's plan for Ubuntu is to achieve MacOS-like seamless integration. Stitching together components from right and left won't cut it. They need to to be at the steering wheel, at least for the components that interface with the user. That will allow them to build deeper emotional connection with their users and thous stronger brand. It has been proven that enstablished projects have their own agendas and will not bend to Ubuntu needs. Also forking and maintaining huge patch sets lead to dead end. Mir and Unity are necessary investments if Ubuntu is to become something more than just a Gnome distro.
Link to UDS session on Mir: https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=w6HnJ3mgT9g