Who Should Lead Linux?



Richard Stallman



How can he help/lead Linux?

Linus Torvalds



How can he help/lead Linux?

Mark Shuttleworth



How can he help Linux?

Who should be the ultimate leader of Linux?








  1. AnonymousJune 07, 2011

    RMS: "He won't compromise his values under any circumstances."

    Unless it means he has to buy his own lunch (or plane ticket per recent history). He'll gladly sacrifice freedom of speech to get his free lunch.

  2. AnonymousJune 07, 2011

    How is RMS' weakness a weakness? He didn't compromise his core values to get us to where we are now, so why should he start? What a ridiculous article.

  3. AnonymousJune 07, 2011

    Linux is a kernel, and 'leadership' is pure meritocracy: make useful stuff and you get a say. Just the way it should be.

    All these three people are already leaders, in their own ways: large groups of people listen to what they say. RMS leads several GNU projects, Linus leads the Linux (kernel) project, Shuttleworth leads Ubuntu.

    So what was the point of this article? You want a leader for some amorpheous, badly defined "Linux" not covered by the projects I already mentioned? What would this "Linux" be? (Would centralising power over Ubuntu, the Linux kernel and the GNU project really solve anything, or just lead to more in-fighting?)

    Also, look up the word "whom".

  4. AnonymousJune 07, 2011

    RMS is a Harvard graduate. Cut his programmer teeth at MIT because he was able to walk into the open labs and this led to him becoming an MIT graduate student (but he dropped out of the program) and staff programmer.

  5. AnonymousJune 07, 2011

    NOT Mark Shuttleworth. That would be the death of the Linux kernel as we know it.

    Why are we suddenly in a Linux kernel leadership crisis, anyway?


    This is exactly my point. Things have been working great for 20 years. Just because some people are starting to install a Linux variant on Grandma and Grandpa's computer doesn't mean Linux needs new commercial direction

  6. AnonymousJune 07, 2011

    Not sure what the point is of this article.


    First of all, what are these rough times that emerged that weren't already being tackled by the various open source and Linux foundations and supporting companies?

    Second of all, why is there a need for some leadership above and beyond Kernel development hierarchy based on proven skill and dedication via commits to the kernel tree?

    Just seems like articles like these are just pushing around drama between end users that aren't really involved in the development, maintenance, or legal issues involving Linux. Why is there a need for such pointless drama?

    Who's the best leader for Linux? Better yet, how should a leadership be formed (as if no one is currently 'taking care' of it - sarcasm)? Let the commits speak for themselves. Linux is not in a crisis. Linux will not be in a crisis anytime soon. Let's get back to hacking.

  7. AnonymousJune 07, 2011

    I don't even understand the question. Who should lead what?

  8. What stemmed this article anyway? It makes no sense, at all.

  9. AnonymousJune 09, 2011

    We aren't Microsoft or Apple with a supposed benevolent dictator running the show. We have many leaders, this is our advantage.

  10. Thanks for the brief profile of these 3 guys.

  11. AnonymousJune 17, 2011

    Mark is not the person to lead! His own Design Team For Ubuntu uses the Adobe Products and those who created omgubuntu use those same Adobe Products! Shame on the Author for even mentioning a person who does not think enough of Gimp, Inkscape etc to have his design team use them! That is why I'm attracted to Fedora since their Design Team does use Gimp, Inkscape etc... A leader has to have faith in what he is selling and Mark Proves he Does Not Have Faith with using the Adobe Products for his Design Team!

  12. @Anonymous

    How did you know that Ubuntu design team and OMGubuntu uses Adobe products?