That's a useful thing to remember! Thanks for pointing it out.

Anyway that's the broad picture of the supposed rivalry which might motivate the perceived 'defiance' of Canonical, and the sense that parts of Ubuntu's stack are 'downstream' from Red Hat or Fedora.

Idk if the characterization really makes sense, but that's what the earlier commenter was talking about, not a proper upstream in terms of distro tooling or repositories.

>Upstart is older than systemd.

So are Unity and Snap compared to GNOME3 and Flatpak.

Unity may have gotten out the door first, but GNOME3 was announced in 2008. Unity was revealed out of the blue in 2010.

Flatpak was born as xdg-app, conceived in 2013 with substantive work beginning in 2014.

In both cases, Canonical was doing their own thing, collaborating with no one, while ignoring projects which do all their development in the open and had been upstream of their desktop stack for years.

Did Canonical 'beat' the community projects within (supposedly) their own community 'to market'? Sure. Does it still reveal relatively little interest in collaborating with the wider free software and Linux desktop community compared to 'upstream-first' organizations? Yes! Does throwing code over the wall after community efforts have been underway in public for years still make you look like a latecomer? Hell yes!

Maybe there are good reasons for that— maybe GNOME is hard to work with, maybe it's somehow better to present years worth of code to the world out of the blue instead of writing proposals. Bu5 it still fits the same picture of Canonical's uneasy relationship to formerly-and later, again-upstream projects like GNOME.