It's doesn't seem like you, taking the part for the whole, bithub.
Neither failing to fully read what you quote:
Google is notorious for not contributing back. It just so happens they did it on 2.6.32. Even though most of that was to offer support for their own business interests.Quote:
There are a couple of other interesting entries here. Google takes a lot of grief for not contributing back, but that company was the source of a fair amount of code going into 2.6.32. Much of that was support for the HTC "Dream" (aka G1 or ADP1) phone platform, but Google also contributed to control groups, ext4, memory management, IPVS, and libata.
If they keep it up from now on, then it indeed becomes false. But for now it isn't.
So, just to annoy you a little ;)
Google is one of the worst contributors even though most of their business is linux based. 2.6.32 didn't change that.
Cycle Gap: Linux Kernel Development Stats from Greg Kroah Hartman
"Google is at number 13 with 1.4% contribution. Without Andrew Morton's contributions Google's would be at the fortieth spot."
Great, take a 1 in a Million example and use that as the Rule that establishes the truth for all cases.
If you have any doubts, the quote is still here and will stay because
a) it is true for most cases,
b) It can be years before I bother changing my sig, and
c) I don't give a f... about your 1 million servers company example. It only proves you think small.
I respect Google for what they are doing with Android. I recently had a chance to work with Android at a systems level and while I am not totally in love with how they shut out all but the Java coders, I do like having a completely free software stack on a phone that you can build from source if the urge hits you.
That said, I too hope they don't "get too big for their britches"....