This entire discussion reminds me of XHTML 2.0, which was determined to replace HTML 4 but then was halted due to HTML5 being developed independently and the W3C was eager to keep its monopole on web-standards. Is HTML5 better than XHTML 2.0? Definitely not, maybe even worse.
So, what teaches us this lesson learned years ago?
When a company starts developing a proprietary solution (for me, Mir is proprietary with the horrible license applied to it) and standards-faculties are feeling pushy to bring out their own solution or even try to implement the foreign solution, then I have to tell you that Canonical is just interested in their own profit and might not even care for a full-fledged solution for the GNU-operating system.
Please people, especially at X.org, open your eyes and do what you've been doing best: promoting Wayland, even though it might not have a multi-billion-dollar company behind it.
Honestly I was just trying to see what e8hffff would say; most of the time it doesn't seem like he knows what he's talking about, so it'd have been amusing. I do think Canonical has a few decent reasons to develop Mir but I think it would've been better for everyone if they stuck with Wayland and tried to get what they want out of their own compositor and proposing changes to the code or writing some themselves.
Wow, that is an excelling argument - barely legible, tired old sentiments, out and out insulting to everyone in the discussion, and it still manages to throw in some anti-antisemitism. It's magic!
Indeed.
I think calling Canonical a multi-billion-dollar company is quite a bit of a stretch, considering they have yet to even make a profit.
Interesting. I've not come across this commercial licence. Does it actually exist or is it an hypothetical commercial licence that you are talking about?
I am genuinely interested in knowing.
Also, what would be wrong in offering the same product under a open source licence and a commercial licence?
If I remember correctly, that is what Digia does with Qt and it seems to work out fine for both sides (The business that is Digia and the open source community around Qt).
Before giving this unqualified reply to me, you should have read up on the facts: Canonical reserves itself the right to turn every open source-project including all contributions done under the GPL into a proprietary one at any time with its CLA applied to e.g. Mir.
If you want to commit to it you need to sign this CLA. That's why this project will never be "free" and should be abandoned asap. Everyone supporting this project is just feeding Canonical with his hard work with the risk of it becoming proprietary and "intellectual property".
They are here to tell you that Linux could not even boot before Canonical blessed us with a dark GNOME theme and defined Linux as we know it.
Personally, I don't mind Ubuntu, but I don't like the direction Canonical has been taking -- isolationist, controlling, NIH.
In any case, absolutely nothing has changed for me since Ubuntu first arrived. But some of the newer converts who are only familiar with Ubuntu tend to be overprotective. They think Linux didn't exist before that![]()