Exactly. In Debian, the community implements security patches. In Ubuntu, Canonical implements security patches for a part of the repo (main), the community implements them for the remainder (universe). This has been the standard since Ubuntu’s inception. With Ubuntu Pro, Canonical implements security patches for the whole repo (main and universe).
Not necessarily. For all of these cases, Debian, Ubuntu, Pro, the community and Canonical are package maintainers. Implementing patches means means one of: grabbing a patch from upstream and applying it to a package (least work, no upstream contribution); deriving a patch for the package from the latest upstream source (more work, no upstream contribution); creating a fix that doesn’t exist upstream and applying it to the package (most work, possible upstream contribution). I don’t know what their internal process is for this last case but I imagine they publish fixes. I’ve definitely seen Canonical upstreaming bug fixes in GNOME, because that’s where I have been paying attention to at some point in time. If you consider submitting such patches upstream as actively involved in project development, then they are actively involved. I probably wouldn’t consider that active involvement just like I don’t consider myself actively involved when I submit a bug fix to some project.
Exactly. In Debian, the community implements security patches. In Ubuntu, Canonical implements security patches for a part of the repo (main), the community implements them for the remainder (universe). This has been the standard since Ubuntu’s inception. With Ubuntu Pro, Canonical implements security patches for the whole repo (main and universe).
So they’re actively involved in the development of open source projects then?
Not necessarily. For all of these cases, Debian, Ubuntu, Pro, the community and Canonical are package maintainers. Implementing patches means means one of: grabbing a patch from upstream and applying it to a package (least work, no upstream contribution); deriving a patch for the package from the latest upstream source (more work, no upstream contribution); creating a fix that doesn’t exist upstream and applying it to the package (most work, possible upstream contribution). I don’t know what their internal process is for this last case but I imagine they publish fixes. I’ve definitely seen Canonical upstreaming bug fixes in GNOME, because that’s where I have been paying attention to at some point in time. If you consider submitting such patches upstream as actively involved in project development, then they are actively involved. I probably wouldn’t consider that active involvement just like I don’t consider myself actively involved when I submit a bug fix to some project.
Ah ok I see. Thanks for the clarification.