SISirGiggles·Nov 15, 2025
> https://github.com/zabbly/incus/issues/89#issuecomment-30764...
> I mean sure, it's the UI component only, and not on the lxc repo but the Zabbly one, and maybe they treat things widely differently depending.
This one is fair since Incus and Zabbly have had no desire to reimplement a web UI, they've instead opted to leave that to the community resulting in LXConsole for example.
Zabbly, for additional context, is Stephane Graber's company that he set up as a consultant service for Linux and Linux Container (both in terms of the Linux Container organization and the LXC project)
As a whole, the project has left the choice of web interface up to the user: https://discuss.linuxcontainers.org/t/incus-6-7-has-been-rel...
> But it's the same developer for both, and I'm willing to bet it's a similar mindset for projects.
This is getting dangero
Read the rest
usly close to a mischaracterization of events surrounding the Linux Containers and Canonical split.
See: https://stgraber.org/2023/12/12/lxd-now-re-licensed-and-unde... in addition to: https://linuxcontainers.org/incus/announcement/
EDIT: I read this part to suggest that former LXD team members that are now on the Incus team potentially have the same mindset, if this is wrong, please correct me.
> And I swear I had a similar experience with regards to some other incus issues where there was a similar response about changes.
So far from my two years of interaction (both as a lurker and commenter) on the forums and purveyor on the issue tracker, I've yet to see anything that resembles treating Canonical LXD as any form of upstream especially since the split.