lets wait and see
Some idiots always talk about freedom and open-source if it suits ones book. They forget about ubuntu did what some radical ditros aging more than one or two decades couldnt .if they didnt secrtly develop mir and announce it six months ago they would find a way to hate whatever they does anyway. Lets accept that conanical know how to reach enduser . Linux user was known as the geekest creatures before ubuntu came in. Now its about to change but haters do what they do. If you block the mir with your jews lobbying like struggles dont even fckng say why linux isnt getting popular
Last edited by omglotsofdots; 03-19-2013 at 07:38 AM.
I agree with the wait and see. As an end user it is fine to see the arguments from developers and want to be developers to people trying to wave their e-peen around. Bottom line though I still don't have something I can run on my desktop for everyday use. I will then take the one I can use and see if it is better than X. I don't care how kludged together X is or how inefficient it is the next thing still has to be better. I need to be able to run my steam games with my nvidia driver, watch videos and do all of the things I want to do. If both Mir and Wayland show up I will try them both and see which one works best for me. Heck if nothing else Mir got a lot more interest in Wayland and might get things moving and get a little competition going.
Real reason to be wary of Mir:
-GPLv3 with CLA
-GPLv3 in a core component which interfaces with proprietary drivers. A lot of corporations avoid GPLv3 (specialy as a core component in a embedded device) and wouldn't use it without getting a proprietary license from Canonical.
-Until Mir's announcement, Canonical's public position was to support Wayland. So for the period of a year Canonical "lied" to the community.
-It's competing with the X replacement, which most parties agreed to (including Canonical). Bringing fragmentation to core "Linux desktop" component
ps: I'm not saying GPLv3 is a bad license, but the motivation for its use may be.
Open source is not strictly about the source code being available.
Originally Posted by Alex Sarmiento
It has to public available for everyone under a FSF-approved and OSI-approved and DFSG-compliant license.
It should be in the spirit of free software, which means the maintainers should accept contributions, and keep development in the open.
Developing it in the secret behind closed-doors for 6 months and and then doing a code drop is not very much in line with the spirit of open source.
Also requiring contributors to sign a CLA isn't very much in the spirit of open source either.
Anything that runs a Linux kernel with some kind of package management is a Linux distribution.
Originally Posted by Prescience500
Disagreed. Every Open Source project contributes in some manner, even if it simply serves notice to other people about the pitfalls of undertaking such project while isolating themselves from the rest of the community.
Originally Posted by Pawlerson
Open source is strictly about the source being available. You are describing something else.
Originally Posted by uid313
What's with all these users with a total number of posts in the single digits being extremely defensive to Canonical, and extremely anti-Wayland?
Canonical is creating Mir for 1 reason only Cellphones and Tablets and that is because only google can put enough pressure on Imagination and Qualcomm to open their drivers and canonical knows that, so they need a server close enough to surfaceflinger so they can reuse the android native drivers [i even bet ubuntu phone will use AOSP kernel until google backport enough to vanilla] but to do so they need a commercial license[or compatible] but without google big brother watch.
on the desktop is very likely you can choose either mir or wayland on ubuntu since i doubt they care too much and that mir build will prolly be FOSS compliant.
btw wayland input patches were around way before canonical started developing Mir, all the problem here is they are switching to a mobile OS company that have a similar OS for your PC, not saying is bad just saying their focus now is mobile and the desktop is just an adittional selling point but not their main target anymore