>However, we are not going to do that until there is a clear revenue
>model to be able to pay the salaries of the developers working on the
>platform itself.
It's sad that even a company like Canonical feels it needs to protect
its revenue with closed-source code. But if you say that's the case,
then I'll take your word for it, and put up with a non-free launchpad
as a necessary evil.
> A better engineering solution to this would be federated communication
> between bugzilla instances, and roundup, and sourceforge, and Launchpad.
This sounds like a good long-term solution, yes.
>I also respect the wishes of someone who chooses not to use Launchpad
>because they do not have a copy of the code.
Indeed; when the 'ultra-orthodox' Ubuntu emerges, I hope it (we?) will
set up an open-source bugtracker &c for it - but one which interacts
with Launchpad as closely as possible.
Thanks for your responses, Mark.
>However, we are not going to do that until there is a clear revenue
>model to be able to pay the salaries of the developers working on the
>platform itself.
It's sad that even a company like Canonical feels it needs to protect
its revenue with closed-source code. But if you say that's the case,
then I'll take your word for it, and put up with a non-free launchpad
as a necessary evil.
> A better engineering solution to this would be federated communication
> between bugzilla instances, and roundup, and sourceforge, and Launchpad.
This sounds like a good long-term solution, yes.
>I also respect the wishes of someone who chooses not to use Launchpad
>because they do not have a copy of the code.
Indeed; when the 'ultra-orthodox' Ubuntu emerges, I hope it (we?) will
set up an open-source bugtracker &c for it - but one which interacts
with Launchpad as closely as possible.
--
Dan O'Huiginn