Advanced

Friction Building Around An Ubuntu Community Council Decision

Posted by seatex on · 5 comments
phoronix; By Michael Larabel
Mail this story
Print this story

The longtime leader of Kubuntu, Jonathan Riddell, appears to be out of any leadership position relating to Ubuntu for at least twelve months. This decision has caused some to criticize the Ubuntu Community Council for their decision made in relative private -- a decision that was also backed by Mark Shuttleworth.

Full Story

  Nav
» Read more about: Story Type: Editorial; Groups: Community, KDE, Ubuntu

» Get new stories by e-mail: nightly or as they are published

« Return to the newswire homepage

  Related stories
» More like this

Comments (5)

of all Council members for a tight grip on as many Baboontu planets as possible. Big M$huttleworth has got to do this to prep for WHEN (not if) the impending IPO is released. Ah, the ever-growing Dark Side of the FOSS!

2c
Uh oh! The Kubuntu community is fully supporting their whipping boy leader! Good for them. Did you see that one coming, Shuttleworth?

Jonathan Riddell gets full support from the Kubuntu community http://www.linuxveda.com/2015/05/26/jonathan-riddell-gets-fu...
Let me see if I can nutshell this, for my own understanding:

Canonical - "Help shape the future of Ubuntu......tell us what to do more of!" < insert coin here >

Riddell - "Guys, where is the money donated to Kubuntu going? Because it sure hasn't hit us yet!"

Canonical - "Yeah it has, we've paid you before... see?"

Riddell - "True enough, but that was just once for a fraction of the amount donated. Where is the rest of it?"

Canonical - < File Not Found >

Riddell - "You guys really need to get your act together, you're a freaking mess!"

Canonical via Ubuntu Council - < Jonathan Riddell banned >

Kubuntu - "Git 'em Riddell!!"

Does that sound about right?
I think you got it in a nutshell pretty tight there, gru.
I haven't been following this, but it's looking like this (as far as I can tell):

... it appears that for some time, Riddell has been seeking answers to another, long-running question namely, whether Canonical will attempt to impose licensing fees or other requirements for downstream distribution of Ubuntu binaries (ie. whether/under what conditions downstream distributions (eg. Linux Mint) can use those binaries).

And apparently Riddell has been asking for clarification on the matter for quite a long time (years?), from a FOSS perspective, and receiving very little meaningful response, aside from some brief corporate-speak a year ago about the lawyers looking into it... and Riddell wasn't prepared to let such transparent fobbing off just slide.

So I get the feeling that some members of the Community Council were indeed feeling very uncomfortable already about dealing with his awkward, inconvenient (but legitimate) questions, when this new matter came up...

Camel, Straw. Straw, Camel.



(If someone has a better understanding, I'm all ears...)

Post a comment

A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.

Your message:
|||||
10
Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help

Sign up and post (it is free)  or  Log in and post