https://insights.ubuntu.com/2017/04/05/ ... nvergence/
In a nutshell, outside investors are in - and the "dead wood" is getting pruned.
Unity was and still is notoriously difficult to "port" to other Linux distributions. This means less people working on the code, less contribution, less adoption - what I would term "proprietary in all but licence" and as with most proprietary software, if the funding is removed... this means that no one will pick up the slack and continue to develop it - long term anyway.
Mir, as with most Canonical software, was released under the GPLv3 and the Canonical CLA. (aka the sounds-good-until-you-realise-they-can-make-all-your-contributions-proprietary licence). As with upstart it has major corporate sponsored, community supported, MIT licenced "competition" and will become less and less relevant as time goes on.
It was Canonical/Shuttleworth who chose to diverge away from Debian/Red Hat norms and develop software such as upstart, Mir and Unity. Coming up with something different is good - but especially if all of that is contributed back in kind. This is where canonical consistently failed - contributing to upstream and giving back useful software which could be built, used, tested and improved on other distributions.
Shuttleworth has written about some of this in his blog:
https://plus.google.com/+MarkShuttlewor ... LYubpaHUHH
The whole Mir hate-fest boggled my mind - it's free software that does something invisible really well. It became a political topic as irrational as climate change or gun control, where being on one side or the other was a sign of tribal allegiance. We have a problem in the community when people choose to hate free software instead of loving that someone cares enough to take their life's work and make it freely available.
I came to be disgusted with the hate on Mir. Really, it changed my opinion of the free software community.
I used to think that it was a privilege to serve people who also loved the idea of service, but now I think many members of the free software community are just deeply anti-social types who love to hate on whatever is mainstream. When Windows was mainstream they hated on it. Rationally, Windows does many things well and deserves respect for those. And when Canonical went mainstream, it became the focus of irrational hatred too. The very same muppets would write about how terrible it was that IOS/Android had no competition and then how terrible it was that Canonical was investing in (free software!) compositing and convergence. Fuck that shit.
I think this exposes a few notable failings and assumptions in this person...
- People always "hate" certain software. It was a financial decision for Canonical to do what they did. Inciting against "Mir haters" shows the contempt Shuttleworth has, not just for these "haters", but for the fanboys as a whole. It's unbelievable that one could think for one minute that supposed hatred from certain quarters could be a factor in closing down these projects and sacking the employees involved.
- He has positioned himself as a "servant" or a great beneficiary who has given so much. And this is where it all went wrong and smelled bad from the start. Canonical were and still are out to make money - the "freedom" mantra was always just part of their marketing and as times changed, that also changed until Debian, Linux, etc ceased to be mentioned in it's propaganda. None of the other big FOSS projects/project leaders are feeling the need to remind everyone of this kind of thing solicit gratitude and blame others for their commercial failure. It was a similar case with the horrendous unity "shopping lens" Amazon fiasco. Users were again presented with the "it's free" propaganda - but also the infamous "we have root" comment.
- The people - or the "servants" - who fueled his fanboy forums and bought into his bullshit and used his distribution and provided the free volunteer tech support for years are finally shown the contempt we knew they were held in all along. The "windows haters" who swallowed "bug #1" and believed they were a part of some big wind change in the operating system landscape, were simply motivated by hate - and he knew that - but they were a means to an end in getting Ubuntu to "top favourite no. 1 distro" status.
- The "problem in the community" is very different to what Mark Shuttleworth envisages, but he's right on a few counts. What he refers to as the "community" is misinformed and prone to double standards and fanboyism. By "the community", he seems to refer to users rather than developers - and that's telling - because for me and most others the "community" is developers. I stopped paying any attention to users a long time ago. Red Hat, the Debian project and many more also stopped paying attention. The same goes for the Linux kernel. If you are contributing code, you matter a little, if not then you're simply noise. This is may not sound ideal, but Linux has changed to developers on one side - mostly backed by corporations - and users on the other side - nowadays treated almost like "customers" and with many behaving like that. Canonical and others promoted culture this and when the "customers" aren't happy, ranty blogs are probably not the best type of response.
- And finally he lets it out - but admittedly did hint at this before with the closing of bug #1 - they should have done an Android...