Linux社区牛人竟然认为Ubuntu公司为害群之马[多图(2)

So, to place Canonical's contribution into perspective, that means theydid 00.10068% of all of the kernel development for the past 3 years.

They are ranked 79th of all companies doing kernel development, withsuch prominate notable Linux supporters like nVidia just barely beatingthem out.

If Canonical was an individual contributor to the kernel, it would be in195th place.

Their individual contributors end up placing in the following locationsbased on their number of contributions 251, 714, 1103, 1327, 1691, 1691,2171, 2171, 2171, 2171. Now to be fair, this is only basing things on quantity, not quality, sothose 100 patches might be major contributions to the kernel, advancingthe state of the art and fixing major bugs that affect thousands ofpeople. I'll let all of you make that call. And finally, lest anyone think I'm picking on Canonical for somereason, here's how they rank within all of the different Linux distros.

Hm, wait, I forgot one non-profit distro that I like a lot, Gentoo,let's add them into the list:

I tried tracking Debian kernel contributions, but as most of the Debiandevelopers don't use a debian.org email address, it is hard, but Iguessed and looked at who they list as their kernel team, combined witha few email addresses that do use a debian.org address and came up withthe following best guess which is probably still not properly countingeverything the Debian developers do:

Ok, that should set the record straight for how many patches Canonicalhas allowed their engineers to contribute back to the kernel community. So, back to the Linux Ecosystem. Wait, what do we mean here by "Linux"? When we first discussed having a Linux conference composed of kerneldevelopers and the developers of the surrounding "base system" ofprograms, we had to come up with a name for all of that. Someoneproposed the term "Plumbing", so we named the conference, the "LinuxPlumbers Conference". Here's a diagram of what I consider to mean the basic description of a"Linux" system: