brainstorming for UDS-N - Application Developers

[Scott Kitterman]

"Matthew Paul Thomas" <mpt at canonical.com> wrote:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>Martin Owens wrote on 02/10/10 21:32:
>>...
>> It's just as important to have it known that applications are not
>> always going to be perfect for everyone, but with a little bit of
>> investment of time or money things will improve. The invitation
>> doesn't even exist in the USC in either invitations to program or
>> invitations to fund.
>
>For invitations to program, we could do a lot better than the current
>launchpad-integration. The only type of contributions suggested are to
>"Translate This Application" (which isn't clear, and probably never
>could be) and "Report a Problem". A single menu item, that went to a
>more informative and context-specific contribution page, could do much
>better.
>
>For donations, the blocker is not Ubuntu Software Center. We need a
>generic donation framework that can be used outside USC as well. For
>example, if you already have an Ubuntu SSO account, Gnome Do's "Donate"
>menu item shouldn't dump you at a page that requires you to have a
>separate Paypal account.
>
>> If we don't take economics seriously we risk ending up with a user
>> base which is self indulgent, unjustly indignant and completely
>> removed from the people who are _paying_ for their computer software.
>> 
>> The last thing I want out of the USC is a view that commercial ==
>> proprietary and charity/happenstance == open source. This is also
>> reflected in how we position the application platform.
>>...
>
>Developers can publish commercial open-source software in USC 3.0 just
>as easily as they can publish commercial proprietary software. And
>non-commercial proprietary software is available in Canonical Partners.
>

This is quite unfortunate. I believe this increased focus on proprietary software integration will raise a barrier to expanding the Ubuntu development community. How much community development did Xandros have? 

Scott K