Personal notes

Mark Shuttleworth has just posted on his blog the interview he released to the italian magazine Linux-Magazine. The interview should appear, translated in Italian, in the next number of the magazine.

It has a great variety of argument addressed and it gives an updates on Shuttleworth's vision on the directions of Ubuntu and also Free Software in general.

I liked the fact that Shuttleworth still considers Ubuntu a 'smaller' project (at least in scope) than Debian, and that the two project still needs (and I believe always will) need each other:

6) A dirty question from our readers: Ubuntu is really a giant now, are you trying to kill the Debian project?
Absolutely not. I’m a Debian Developer myself, and very proud of what Debian has achieved, and also proud of everything that Ubuntu contributes to the broader Debian project. We consider Ubuntu to be a member of the Debian family, that’s just purely focused on the specific use cases and platforms that our customers want.

Much of what we do in Ubuntu contributes directly to Debian. We lead the packaging of many important pieces of the desktop, and server, and toolchain, and contribute that work directly to Debian. As a result, Debian is updated much faster these days than it used to be without Ubuntu. We have lead many key transitions and always try to collaborate with the relevant people upstream AND in Debian to ensure that the work flows smoothly into those projects. Most DD’s are very happy to collaborate, but some view Ubuntu as a threat, and refuse to collaborate, or make unreasonable demands on Ubuntu because they think “you have money” when in fact most of Ubuntu is volunteer driven.

My vision is that Debian and Ubuntu both grow stronger through good collaboration. I’m trying to have a keynote accepted at DebConf to help make that vision a reality, but so far have had no luck in getting approval. Hopefully, the leadership of Debian will start to come around tot he idea that Ubuntu’s success is very good for Debian.

I also liked his position on Microsoft strategies and voices over an alledged collaboration Canonical-Microsoft. The tone of the answer is 'cold' and gauged. Although Canonical/Ubuntu are in no way comparable (in the market pervasiveness), still Mark feels confident enough to assess and judge Microsoft's strategies as if he'd been a market analyst. BTW his judgements about the Microsoft-Novell deal, MS patent nonsens and OOXML issue, are not so positive:

13) In a interview (http://mybroadband.co.za/nephp/?m=show&id=6672) you declared that “you’d love to work with Microsoft”. Do you want to make another deal following the Novell one or what?
I am very happy to work with Microsoft, or any other company, to improve the state of free software and the software industry as a whole. There are many things that we can collaborate on where we have shared interests – encouraging good telecommunications policy, for example.

But I will not agree to a deal like the Novell one, because I don’t think there is any IP issue in fact, and until Microsoft actually states what patents it is concerned about there is no need for us to take any action. Unfortunately for Novell, I think they have done a deal which gives them a short-term boost, at a very high long term cost. Time will tell.

14) And what do you think about the OOXML standard and the Microsoft Open Promise?
I don’t believe that ISO’s declaration of OOXML as a standard will actually deliver any benefit to users of Microsoft Office. They will still be using a big, bloated piece of software with no competition, that is not-quite-standards-compliant. That’s a pity. Microsoft’s customers had an opportunity to ignite real innovation in the office document space, by encouraging Microsoft to support and existing, open, well-defined document standard in ODF. But they didn’t – Microsoft managed to push enough partners and resellers into the standards process that the ISO decision did not really reflect anything other than Microsoft’s commercial interests.