This is a follow-up to Jon’s original post on Carefully (but purposefully) oxidising Ubuntu and Julian’s migration spec for 25.10. We promised transparency throughout this process, and this post is written in that spirit. What happened after the announcement Following the decision to adopt rust-coreutils, we got to work. Any package shipped by default in Ubuntu must be promoted to Ubuntu Main, which requires passing a thorough security review. We quickly assembled an internal team spanning Ubun...
So open source is only for people who already in the club then? Who gets to have a say? What are the restrictions on that say?
MIT defenders are laveyian satanists until someone has an opinion they disagree with lol.
I’m genuinely astounded that a recurring argument for simply dismissing suggestions to change the license to the one the original project had is “that’s my purse, I don’t know you!”
I could understand where you’re coming from if the people were, to a man, rude and demanding. Having read lots of threads about rust/mit rewrites of c/gpl stuff and participated in several, they’re pretty often just like me: politely presenting a perfectly reasonable argument even when met with very defensive pushback.
The requirements are not at all strict. Submit even one bug report or issue, or do literally anything positive rather than show up for the first time and whine about the management of the project or whatever out of nowhere and then maybe people will take your opinion more seriously.
The threads are indeed filled with people like you given that in a number of your posts you went and complained about Rust as a whole. This is ignoring that the other highly upvoted top-level post in this very thread called the project maintainers cucks and so on.
Yes.
Open source is more than code, it’s software for everyone including non programmers.
You don’t need to be a programmer to contribute. That’s just your bias. Anyway, I’m done with this.
So open source is only for people who already in the club then? Who gets to have a say? What are the restrictions on that say?
MIT defenders are laveyian satanists until someone has an opinion they disagree with lol.
I’m genuinely astounded that a recurring argument for simply dismissing suggestions to change the license to the one the original project had is “that’s my purse, I don’t know you!”
I could understand where you’re coming from if the people were, to a man, rude and demanding. Having read lots of threads about rust/mit rewrites of c/gpl stuff and participated in several, they’re pretty often just like me: politely presenting a perfectly reasonable argument even when met with very defensive pushback.
The requirements are not at all strict. Submit even one bug report or issue, or do literally anything positive rather than show up for the first time and whine about the management of the project or whatever out of nowhere and then maybe people will take your opinion more seriously.
The threads are indeed filled with people like you given that in a number of your posts you went and complained about Rust as a whole. This is ignoring that the other highly upvoted top-level post in this very thread called the project maintainers cucks and so on.
Anyway, now I’m actually done.