×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

TWiki.net Kicks Out All TWiki Contributors

CmdrTaco posted more than 5 years ago | from the what-does-that-mean dept.

Software 194

David Gerard noted an interesting story going down with a relatively minor project that has interesting implications for any Open Source project. He writes "Ten years ago, Peter Thoeny started the TWiki wiki engine. It attracted many contributors at twiki.org. About a year ago, Thoeny founded the startup twiki.net. On 27th October, twiki.net locked all the other contributors out of twiki.org in an event Thoeny called 'the twiki.org relaunch.' Here's the IRC meeting log. All the other core developers have now moved to a new project, NextWiki. Is it a sensible move for a venture capital firm that depends on a healthy Open Source community to lock it out?"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

194 comments

This is why mediawiki is a better project (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25555517)

A couple weeks ago, while browsing around the library downtown, I had to take a piss. As I entered the john, Barack Obama -- the messiah himself -- came out of one of the booths. I stood at the urinal looking at him out of the corner of my eye as he washed his hands. He didn't once look at me. He was busy and in any case I was sure the secret service wouldn't even let me shake his hand.

As soon as he left I darted into the booth he'd vacated, hoping there might be a lingering smell of shit and even a seat still warm from his sturdy ass. I found not only the smell but the shit itself. He'd forgotten to flush. And what a treasure he had left behind. Three or four beautiful specimens floated in the bowl. It apparently had been a fairly dry, constipated shit, for all were fat, stiff, and ruggedly textured. The real prize was a great feast of turd -- a nine inch gastrointestinal triumph as thick as his cock -- or at least as I imagined it!

I knelt before the bowl, inhaling the rich brown fragrance and wondered if I should obey the impulse building up inside me. I'd always been a liberal democrat and had been on the Obama train since last year. Of course I'd had fantasies of meeting him, sucking his cock and balls, not to mention sucking his asshole clean, but I never imagined I would have the chance. Now, here I was, confronted with the most beautiful five-pound turd I'd ever feasted my eyes on, a sausage fit to star in any fantasy and one I knew to have been hatched from the asshole of Barack Obama, the chosen one.

Why not? I plucked it from the bowl, holding it with both hands to keep it from breaking. I lifted it to my nose. It smelled like rich, ripe limburger (horrid, but thrilling), yet had the consistency of cheddar. What is cheese anyway but milk turning to shit without the benefit of a digestive tract?

I gave it a lick and found that it tasted better then it smelled.

I hesitated no longer. I shoved the fucking thing as far into my mouth as I could get it and sucked on it like a big half nigger cock, beating my meat like a madman. I wanted to completely engulf it and bit off a large chunk, flooding my mouth with the intense, bittersweet flavor. To my delight I found that while the water in the bowl had chilled the outside of the turd, it was still warm inside. As I chewed I discovered that it was filled with hard little bits of something I soon identified as peanuts. He hadn't chewed them carefully and they'd passed through his body virtually unchanged. I ate it greedily, sending lump after peanutty lump sliding scratchily down my throat. My only regret was that Barack Obama wasn't there to see my loyalty and wash it down with his piss.

I soon reached a terrific climax. I caught my cum in the cupped palm of my hand and drank it down. Believe me, there is no more delightful combination of flavors than the hot sweetness of cum with the rich bitterness of shit. It's even better than listening to an Obama speech!

Afterwards I was sorry that I hadn't made it last longer. But then I realized that I still had a lot of fun in store for me. There was still a clutch of virile turds left in the bowl. I tenderly fished them out, rolled them into my handkerchief, and stashed them in my briefcase. In the week to come I found all kinds of ways to eat the shit without bolting it right down. Once eaten it's gone forever unless you want to filch it third hand out of your own asshole. Not an unreasonable recourse in moments of desperation or simple boredom.

I stored the turds in the refrigerator when I was not using them but within a week they were all gone. The last one I held in my mouth without chewing, letting it slowly dissolve. I had liquid shit trickling down my throat for nearly four hours. I must have had six orgasms in the process.

I often think of Barack Obama dropping solid gold out of his sweet, pink asshole every day, never knowing what joy it could, and at least once did, bring to a grateful democrat.

Answer: (3, Insightful)

ustolemyname (1301665) | more than 5 years ago | (#25555549)

No.

You make a good point... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25555679)

but on the other hand, yes.

Re:You make a good point... (1)

MindKata (957167) | more than 5 years ago | (#25555949)

"but on the other hand", as the title says, "Is it a sensible move for a venture capital firm that depends on a healthy Open Source community to lock it out?" ... then this sounds very like playing into the hands of close source software marketing. Implying effectively, Close_Source==safe, Open_Source==unsafe.... But thats just playing to the Microsoft marketing style line. Open source is still open. Plus out of all open source projects, this is a rare event, so its not a reason to be scared off from open source projects. Plus its just as bad when close source changes direction, to maintain its position of lock in.

Re:You make a good point... (5, Insightful)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556409)

Close_Source==Money, Open_Source==!Money

Fixed it for you. I'm a noob taking a software engineering class at a community college.

We had a consultant come in for show-and-tell and he made some very good points, but he told us to stay away from open source because(shortened version) if we wanted to be well-known in the open source world then we'd have to slog it out full-time, fighting amongst other egos working for free just trying to get our names known.

But how is that different from working on proprietary software? Working on proprietary software earns a paycheck.

Note that the above is not my personal opinion, but after I graduate I won't have any more basements to live in and I will be hungry.

Re:You make a good point... (4, Insightful)

electrofelix (1079387) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556723)

The majority of the big open source projects are developed in collaboration by companies paying their employees to work on them in order to get more out of the software in their environment. So it suggests that the consultant in question may not be the best person to listen too

If you plan to try and make a name for yourself in the hope of getting spotted and hired, that's probably a tall order. The rest of us just look for a job that will result in us getting paid to work on open source.

Of course it also ignores the other benefits to a developer: Gain experience with a particular language, sharpen your coding, prove that you're coding is good enough to be accepted by a project, become familiar with various API's.

Being able to demonstrate in an interview that you are familiar with the API's, language, coding style, algorithms that are in use in the job that you are applying for should prove invaluable. Too many proprietary companies have a habit of strapping you down with so many NDA's that it's virtually impossible to discuss what you're doing in your current job aside from vague details.

Re:You make a good point... (2, Insightful)

mr_mischief (456295) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557747)

It is hard for the employee to apply specific knowledge of something like Windows or PhotoShop to another project.

More importantly it's easy for an OSS programmer to apply what he knows about the Linux kernel from one job to his next job where the Linux kernel is the topic of programing work. It's easy to apply experience programming the GIMP, even exact function names and their implementations, to another job improving the GIMP. It's even easy to take code directly from one of these projects and use it in another project with the same license or a compatible license.

That means that for employers, in exchange for giving up the privacy and competitive advantage of keeping their source sealed on a proprietary project, that they gain a few things by going Open Source at least on certain projects. Not only do they often get a project that's already running instead of starting from scratch (which BSD could offer and still let them close the source, even!). Not only do they also have a chance at getting the public to help them develop their project by keeping it open.

They also get to develop specific skills and knowledge in their hiring pool. If someone's an OSS developer for a company's project in his spare time or as one duty at his current employer, he's already well on his way to being productive with the code for which the project's sponsor company needs developers.

You'll find no work then (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25556875)

Why would someone take YOU on when they don't know you from Adam?

If you've had a large role in writing a driver for Exchange working with Evolution, they'll know you're the doberman's doobries.

Re:You'll find no work then (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25557137)

But part of the problem is fighting your way up the open source ranks into a project which does just that unless you're under corporate sponsorship or you do it yourself or you round up a few buddies...and if it were that easy then Linux would Just Work(TM)

Re:You make a good point... (4, Interesting)

Foofoobar (318279) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556877)

Well I don't know of any open source developers who are hungry or live in basements. In fact they are VERY well paid; they work on their open source projects as part of their job (sponsored by their employer) or in their spare time (hobby,cash on the side). As for not making money, it's only when you look at it from a TRADITIONAL model. Every developer can make money if they want once they become a contributor to a project. They can write a book on the project, they can expend the project, they can start a support company for the project, they can do training or installing of the project, etc etc.

This is why we don't live in basements and are successful. We see more than one answer and more than one way to make money. Tfrue entrepeneurs realize this and don't just sit on their ass and whine about open source tealing their glory; they realize that open source is the new market and adapt to the changing market.

Perhaps you will realize this when you come out of your parents basement.

If I wanted to be an author (1)

ClosedSource (238333) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557829)

I would have majored in creative writing in college. If you don't want to make a living by developing software, why limit yourself to writing books on open source applications? That's going to be a low-volume seller.

In any case, there are a few well-known companies that make money directly from open source software but like diet plans "the results are not typical".

Re:If I wanted to be an author (1)

Foofoobar (318279) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557907)

You are assuming that's ones ONLY source of income again which was the original authors incorrect assumption. Open source is often a 'side income' for most where their main job supplies the majority of income and the open source income supplies a tidy side income; the job supports the open source project of course usually but if it doesn't, the LIST of things (publishing, support, installation, training, etc) are all various ways that open source projects make money... no one singular way.

Again, you have to think like an entrepeneur as every open source project that wants to make money will be doing.

Re:You make a good point... (2, Insightful)

Anubis350 (772791) | more than 5 years ago | (#25558131)

This guy isnt lookign to get paid for open source or contribute to cool projects, he's looking to become a rock star and get paid because he made his name, not the guy you really want on an OS project anyway, we already *have* enough egos out there :-p

Re:You make a good point... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25558423)

I totally agree, I use TWiki, I contribute code to TWiki. I'm very well paid but I don't work for TWiki, I work for a consulting firm that uses TWiki to help us provide services to our clients.

If they make me jump through a bunch of hoops I'll just switch over to NextWiki and send my code there.

Re:You make a good point... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25557021)

I will let you in on a little secret. I went to a division III college in a small town. The people I ended up graduating with in computing mostly had trouble finding jobs and those that did seemed bored by them, mostly working in insurance, accounting, etc. They were taught VB, Java, and Cobol in school, but not necessarily how to think like a programmer.

I ended up going back to school at a much larger school, and getting a degree in an analytical field, which has a piece of open source software that I use at my job regularly. I have contributed my time and efforts to improving this project because I use it and need those improvements, and it helps others. I do this during work sometimes, but often times at night. I do this because I *like* it. I have no conceptions of making a name for myself.

And now I've just switched cities and had to find a new job. It's tough for a lot of people. Guess what? During the interviews, it comes up that I actually enjoy programming, contribute to this project, and generally have a good understanding of programming. I've had three offers this month already, in a tough economy.

The point? It's much easier to find work when you are passionate about what you're doing, as many open source authors are. It's not cause and effect, it's correlation. Those who are working on open source tend to be those who really enjoy programming, and that is of course correlated with being good at it. I would not listen to anyone who told me to 'stay away' from it if I enjoyed it, that sounds like a pathetic person.

Re:You make a good point... (2, Interesting)

bjelkeman (107902) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557055)

I work on open source software and get paid. So there!

Actually we are looking for a really experienced HTML / CSS programmer/designer preferably with a background Python and Django. Some PHP experience is of curse useful. Provable work on open source code is a large merit. If you are based in Europe is better than any other continent for us. If you are based in Stockholm or Delft you can probably hopp over for an interview. :)

Re:You make a good point... (1)

ChrisA90278 (905188) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557065)

"Note that the above is not my personal opinion, but after I graduate I won't have any more basements to live in and I will be hungry."

I finished school in 1982 studied CS. In the time between then and now I've written a lot of non-free code. Most would be useless as Open Source as it did things like control a radar system and handle data comming from spacecraft, not the kinds of things that most people need to do. But I've also written some softare that I've given away as GPL. Some for the astronomy comunity, some driver level stuff for Linux a few fixes to a DBMS and so on.

OK, My point is that VERY few Open Source programmers do it full time. Most have day jobs to pay the bills. Only very infrequently have I been able to work on Open source wile getting paid. The two times whaen I did it was correcting bugs in free software that we were using at work. I did those bug fixes on the clock but that amonts to about 20 hours over 20 years. Mostly I'd work at home after dinner rather than watch TV.

Re:You make a good point... (1)

pla (258480) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557089)

he told us to stay away from open source because(shortened version) if we wanted to be well-known in the open source world then we'd have to slog it out full-time, fighting amongst other egos working for free just trying to get our names known.

That makes one seriously incorrect assumption - That, in the capacity of doing your 9-to-5 job, you care about fame (outside the local food chain).

I've used open source extensively, and made a few contributions back to the community. You've almost certainly never heard of me, but you can bet the farm that I, my employers and customers, and even the open source community, have all benefited from my use of open source.

If you do FOSS as a way to keep your skill set updated while underemployed, perhaps fame matters. If you just want to use FOSS to make your life better, occasionally giving something back, fame means nothing - I get paid whether I roll my own or use open source to solve the problem; and if I solve a two-month problem in a week by using something that already exists that I can quickly modify to my needs, I look pretty damned good to everyone that matters (ie, my boss or customer)


But how is that different from working on proprietary software? Working on proprietary software earns a paycheck.

Not a real difference, since working on FOSS doesn't preclude earning a paycheck.

Re:You make a good point... (2, Informative)

Mr. Slippery (47854) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557165)

I'm a noob taking a software engineering class at a community college.

In other words, you have no idea what you're talking about, but you feel free to come into a forum full of software professionals and make sweeping statements.

Yeah. Good luck with that career, young padawan.

But how is that different from working on proprietary software? Working on proprietary software earns a paycheck.

Working on free software can also earn a paycheck. Big projects have funding.

Also, the vast majority of software developers work on bespoke, in-house projects, not things meant to be turned into COTS products. People pull in a free software package to get a job done for their company, and contributing patches back is usually to their benefit.

For example, I wanted to do some automated testing. I found that WebInject [webinject.org] did almost, but not quite, what I needed; I made the changes. All this was on the company's dime. With the boss's permission, I contributed the changes back; we benefit in that this new capability will be part of future releases, rather than requiring me to re-integrate.

We win, the community wins. And that's the day-to-day truth of free software: not people working for free in their basements, but skilled professionals sharing ideas to improve the craft of software.

Re:You make a good point... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25557327)

In other words, you have no idea what you're talking about, but you feel free to come into a forum full of software professionals and make sweeping statements.

Yeah. Good luck with that career, young padawan.

They quoted that what the consultant said was not their personal opinion. People come to slashdot for the discussions, which includes learning, and not all slashdotters are programmers or engineers. Hearing a pontificating "software professional" who can't even understand an entire slashdot whole post would turn me away from computing a hell of a lot faster than a clueless consultant would...or are all so-called "software professionals" also clueless, pontificating consultants?

Re:You make a good point... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25557445)

They quoted that what the consultant said was not their personal opinion. People come to slashdot for the discussions, which includes learning, and not all slashdotters are programmers or engineers.

Yeah, right. He says he's just quoting the consultant. But he couches that between his "fixed" remark and "basement" remark. The opinion is clearly his own. He just has the grace to admit it's based entirely on hearsay.

Re:You make a good point... (1)

ajs (35943) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557527)

We had a consultant come in for show-and-tell

It's too easy to shoot this down here, but I'll just state for the record that you could easily have found someone to speak who would have said anything, so the source isn't really interesting. You're really just stating your own opinion, here. Had you said that, it might have sounded a bit better.

he made some very good points, but he told us to stay away from open source because (shortened version) if we wanted to be well-known in the open source world then we'd have to slog it out full-time, fighting amongst other egos working for free just trying to get our names known.

I have not stayed away from open source. I've not had to "log it out full-time." I've not had to "fight amongst other egos." I've never even worried about how well-known my name is.

Open source software provides, for the engineer, three things:

* Very low barrier-to-entry exposure to sophisticated tools
* Exposure to the kinds of practical coding concerns that you will face elsewhere
* The ability to not only claim that you've worked with a technology, but to demonstrate the fruits of your work

If your goal from day one is to be a core contributor to a project, then yes, it will be a lot of work. You might even decide that that's worth it someday, but no one has to make that level of commitment in order to contribute to open source.

Re:You make a good point... (1)

cptdondo (59460) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557535)

I think your consultant was an idiot. The vast majority of Open Source devs are paid by their companies. At my last job I was paid relatively well to give my work away. :-)

Basically we layered some PHP scripts on top of modified elinks code to come up with an end-user configurable industrial panel.

I got paid, the company made money, no egos (other than perhaps the company president) involved.

Granted, I didn't become well-known in the OS world, but really... How many closed source programmers do you know by name? And friends don't count.

I actually did the research to answer this for my last employer. IIRC something like 60% (or maybe 80%) of Open Source developers are paid....

Re:You make a good point... (1)

ianare (1132971) | more than 5 years ago | (#25558231)

Not sure I understand you. Did you use OSS within closed source project, or did you make a new OSS project out of already existing code ?

Re:You make a good point... (1)

i.of.the.storm (907783) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557715)

Err if you really want to get pedantic it should be

Close_Source==Money, Open_Source!=Money

because you don't know whether Money is a boolean, you're just comparing the two.

Re:You make a good point... (1)

Austerity Empowers (669817) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557861)

Dealing with ego's is eternal. You cannot escape it, anytime, anywhere. They're at work, they're in open source, they run your HOA or your local government. They crap on you all the time. The question is what can you do about it, to achieve what you consider to be an acceptable quality of life.

With open source, you are free to individually decide whether the ego behind a contribution is worth dealing with. He either is so prolific/intelligent/hard working, that his attitude is worth dealing with, or he is not, and you can take your business elsewhere. If enough people agree with you, you've got fork. Plus, your open source code is out there, and your reputation can be justified by actual work you do. You had no paycheck to begin with, so you really don't lose much.

At work, coding professionally, you have to tolerate any egos you work with, period. Whether they contribute or not, whether they may be the bosses drinking buddy/son/daughter/blackmailer/etc. Until he stops working with you, you have to deal with him. Unless he crosses a line (in the US) into harassment of some legally accepted form, all you can do is quit. Your code will be proprietary, and you will only have word of mouth on your side. You lose your paycheck in the process. If enough people quit, maybe something will happen...but in this economy you will struggle to get that level of cooperation in this sector. Note it can be legally problematic to incite your coworkers to quit due to things you may have signed when hired, or other lawsuits.

That's really what it's about. There's no reason not to touch open source or to avoid open source jobs, unless you signed some agreement with your present employer stating that you would not. Plenty of people have made names for themselves in open source, some of which are actually great people.

Trust me, an internet nobody who is about to quote the muppets, never make a decision based on "people". "...So, peoples is peoples. Okay?" They're the same everywhere, every once in a while you land in a good group of motivated people who suppress their egos long enough to do something great...but most of time time you have to create that, starting with yourself, wherever you land.

Re:You make a good point... (1)

ianare (1132971) | more than 5 years ago | (#25558063)

That's simply not true ! I must have made oh, about $200 in donations from my open source projects. Over the course of 2.5 years. OK so maybe the guy had a point.

More seriously, these are hobby projects ... I get to do what I want, when I want, simply for the pleasure of coding. If other people actually like my software enough to throw a couple bucks my way, then all the better.
If the consultant was suggesting making any money from hobbyist projects (closed source or not), he is a loon.

Similarly, your consultant is, quite frankly, an idiot if he thinks most open source software gets done by hobbyists. Case in point, not more than 35% [lwn.net] of that flagship OSS project, the linux kernel, is done by volunteers.
And on a personal note, while I have never been employed primarily as an open source developer, all my employers have encouraged, or at the very least allowed, me to contribute to OSS projects that were used in-house. Mainly in the form of patches, but hey every bit helps.

Re:You make a good point... (1)

thermian (1267986) | more than 5 years ago | (#25558291)

We had a consultant come in for show-and-tell and he made some very good points, but he told us to stay away from open source because(shortened version) if we wanted to be well-known in the open source world then we'd have to slog it out full-time, fighting amongst other egos working for free just trying to get our names known.
 

For big projects there is truth in that. However there is also truth in saying that the only way to get a really good programing job is to gain lots of experience, and open source is a good place to get it.

I on the other hand have my own FOSS product. I'm the sole developer, although I have accepted some code from others over the years. With a small project you get to set all the timescales, all the goals, everything.

I don't make money with it, but I get invites to universities, free attendance at conferences, and I help with supervision of Msc/Ph.D students who use my stuff. In short, I have a lot of fun.

No-one else has ever shown much interest in joining my project. I don't mind though, I have fun, and being in control of a product used by hundreds of people is actually quite a buzz.

I get my money from my day job, so that's not a worry. If you want to earn money from open source then you either have to create software which is then provided as part of a paid service, get a job for an open source company, or get yourself involved in a big project and work your way up.

Re:You make a good point... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25558531)

Well, I guess we know why you're going to community college...

Writing software at work and working on open source software aren't exclusive. The vast majority of people writing open source do both.

Re:You make a good point... (1)

Zadaz (950521) | more than 5 years ago | (#25558627)

Not that I totally disagree with you, but you are clearly parroting the words of some guy who talked to you for half an hour with little understanding.

Don't base policy decisions on some guy who just came to class one day.

Trust me, consultants don't go talk to undergrads at the coco unless they're selling something.

What was he selling? You should know, you clearly bought it.

Re:You make a good point... (2, Interesting)

hey! (33014) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557063)

Isn't the whole point of free software to limit the impact of this kind of decision? Part of the maximization of freedom is the freedom to stop working with other developers, both the freedom to fork, and the freedom to force others to fork.

If the core developers have the source code, and rights to that source code we are talking about, potentially, three things of value: (1) the project name and (2) access to the source code server and by extension (3) access to the source archives. Of these, the only serious blow is loss of access to the archives.

If the person who organizes a project decides to kick everyone else out, that's his right, so long as he honors any agreements made with the other contributors, such as honoring terms for files they have contributed. Things get most tricky when it comes to patches that have been submitted, but the honorable thing is clear: make the source available for every binary version ever distributed.

Re:Answer: (1, Insightful)

electrictroy (912290) | more than 5 years ago | (#25555709)

Yes.

Stealing other people's work is a very effective strategy to succeed in business without really trying. Look at Microsoft.

Long Answer (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25556149)

Another strategy is to never let the "community" in. Look at Alfresco. They get lots of press and kudos for being open source, but are very protective of their code and don't let contributors in. But they keep the "community" gathered outside their gates because they've never done anything to alienate them. They just started out as somewhat hostile and will never get flak for staying that way.

They only other similarly managed project that pops to mind for me right now is Liferay.

Re:Long Answer (1)

mabhatter654 (561290) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557167)

That's probably the point. VC's like to see that they "own" an interest in everything. Some lawyer probably wanted them to pull the access or not get funding to protect their new "property". Of course the company was only worth while because of the community. That's what the IP lawyer types always miss. The contributed code may or may not be assigned to the site owner so just pulling contributor access is not enough. If they've cut off contributors they have all sorts other problems starting with not being able to change and redistribute under anything less than open source licenses without express permission of ALL the Contributors... which are locked out...

set up .wiki (1)

rs79 (71822) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556381)

Make it a tld. Post the nameservers here. That is if it's a usefull tool. If you jsut want to speculate on the names the line forms at the right over by the icann booth.

Re:Answer: (1)

electrictroy (912290) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556777)

Yes.

Stealing other people's work is a very effective strategy to succeed in business without really trying. Get free work, then package it as retail software, and $profit$.

Server logs reveal real reason for lockout (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25555607)

bidi-bidi-bidi bidi-bidi-bidi bidi-bidi-bidi...

Personal crap. (0)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 5 years ago | (#25555691)

*from the end of the log*

gmc my sisters boyfriend left home leaving a suicide note..
i'm off

Jesus, isn't it bad taste to leave in things like this when you're posting a log to a news site?

Re:Personal crap. (1)

Cocoa Radix (983980) | more than 5 years ago | (#25555751)

Yes, but it's also entertaining. It was almost like a nice reward for reading through to the end of the log! (Nice for me, not for gmc's sister's boyfriend...)

Re:Personal crap. (5, Funny)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 5 years ago | (#25555913)

so she's available?

Re:Personal crap. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25557737)

shes available... and worth dying over!

captcha: wetness

wtf.. cant make that kinda stuff up. ha

Re:Personal crap. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25556021)

Its just the wrong link in the article. Instead of linking to the release meeting of twiki, where all this happend, it links to the discussion in the fork channel later on.

for the interested, thats the interesing log :

http://twikifork.org/Fork/TWikiReleaseMeeting2008x10x27

Twiki blows (4, Interesting)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 5 years ago | (#25555731)

...at least, the version we used did. Sample problems, just off the top of my head were incompatibilities with Safari, and moronic account "management".

Despite clear evidence that Safari does auth just fine, Twiki wouldn't let any of our Safari users view pages without presenting them with TWO auth requests, and the developers blamed Apple and refused to release a fix into code.

A "reset my password" form would (are you ready?) email the wiki maintainer with a request to reset that user's password.

While it's fast and has a simple file-based structure, it's also one of the worst web apps I've ever seen.

Re:Twiki blows (1)

rmstar (114746) | more than 5 years ago | (#25555961)

indeed. And this without counting the rather bizarre programming model it uses for the Twiki Apps. It probably deserves an entry in the Turing tar pit. *shudder*.

Re:Twiki blows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25556007)

Been using TWiki for a while now and always with Safari; always worked good for me.

Re:Twiki blows (5, Informative)

Ed Avis (5917) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556141)

I think the most serious criticism of TWiki is its poor security track record. I used to run a site, until it was compromised by a widespread exploit uploading a PHP file as an attachment, which TWiki then saves in a directory served directly by Apache - so an attacker can upload any program he wants and it runs with privileges of the web server. In my case, it was a rather handy remote administration tool that lets you alter any file on the system (that's writable by Apache) and download the contents of /etc/passwd.

OK, anyone could get caught out by such a mistake, but the response of the TWiki developers does not inspire confidence. They added a blacklist of 'bad file extensions' so that filenames ending .php cannot be uploaded. Of course, this falls into the mistake of 'enumerating badness' and leaves you open to the next magic file extension that the developers hadn't thought of. At least in TWiki 2 the problem has been dealt with properly by using a CGI script to serve attachments, rather than leaving them to the vagaries of Apache's configuration (which is great for a website you maintain yourself, not so good for directories where anyone can upload any file with any name).

It appeared that the TWiki developers' security process was purely reactive - kludging in fixes to exploits as they were discovered - and nobody was auditing the code to discover holes before the bad guys do, or just to clean up bad smells that might or might not lead to an exploit later.

Looking at the TWiki code, it's rather a mess and doesn't seem to take the paranoid precautions you need in Perl when running system() and other interaction with the outside world - precautions particularly needed in a CGI program that's meant to be publicly accessible. I am a keen Perl programmer but TWiki is the kind of code that gives Perl a bad reputation.

That said, in an environment where you trust everybody (like a company webserver accessible only on your network) TWiki is a very handy application. I rather like the grungy way it keeps page content in RCS archives; you can hack up scripts to automatically import your existing static HTML pages into the wiki. But if I were installing a new wiki now I would use something else: preferably the kind of wiki that works by generating a set of static HTML pages and updating them on edits. That seems to have the smallest attack surface and the best performance.

Re:Twiki blows (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25556897)

you really should configure your apache better.

Re:Twiki blows (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557937)

you really should configure your apache better.

True, but you should also be able to run a popular web application on something less hardened than an OpenBSD server configured by a paranoid schizophrenic.

Re:Twiki blows (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25557453)

That said, in an environment where you trust everybody (like a company webserver accessible only on your network)

I'm being nitpicky here but insider attacks are still a proper threat, in fact it's treated as one of the same level as others in some academic institutions that teach IT Security (at least the ones I've experienced, it's probably more if not all).

In a perfect world it's better to just remove the problem than to mitigate risk.

Re:Twiki blows (1)

ccharles (799761) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556219)

I actually really like TWiki. It's been very stable for us, and is super easy to use. Here are some benefits:
  • Uses rcs instead of a database in the backend, which simplifies administration and backups
  • Access control and permissions are embedded directly into wiki pages ("topics" in TWiki-speak) using the same markup
  • Namespaces via "Webs" help to organize content
  • Tons of features are shipped by default (e.g. email notifications, WYSIWYG editor, versioned attachments, very flexible access management) and tons more available as plugins (e.g. Topic tagging, collapsable tree-views showing the semantic relationship between topics)
  • Pretty by default, though this is very subjective

Re:Twiki blows (3, Funny)

Omnifarious (11933) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556403)

It looks like then that they're well on their way to becoming a respected piece of enterprise software.

Re:Twiki blows (2, Interesting)

Lord Ender (156273) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557057)

We switched fro twiki to DekiWiki and are mostly pleased. Deki has a rich-text editor (no wiki mark-up to learn). It also integrates with Active Directory and does other neat enterprisey things.

On the downside, Deki absolutely chokes if you try and cut-n-paste into it from other applications. I hope they fix that. If you switch to Deki, be prepared to fight with formatting a lot, including editing HTML directly to figure out why making one word bold makes the entire paragraph bold.

What the hell? (2, Insightful)

mewshi_nya (1394329) | more than 5 years ago | (#25555749)

If you have a community, you don't piss them off like this, for exactly this reason. They will kill you in the press.

Every project that goes commercial (MySQL, I'm looking at you) has a heritage of open source. By killing off the community that created it, they are going to kill off their commercial prospects.

Re:What the hell? (3, Informative)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557903)

Since Day One, Theony has been looking to cash in on TWiki. That's motivated a lot of dumb moves on his part — this last nonsense being one of many.

Actually, the big problem is not so much Theony's desire to be the next Red Hat as the boneheaded way he goes about it. He wants to sell TWiki as an "enterprise collaboration platform" despite the existence of many existing products in that customers space. Most of them are more powerful and easy to customize than TWiki, and many of them are open source.

The main result is that when you install a TWiki, your default pages are full of arcane markup designed to support these "Enterprise" features. When I installed my department TWiki, I spend a lot of time stripping out this crap, to avoid confusing my non-nerd users.

The current version also makes a new WYSIWYG editor the default — and hardwires it into the system in numerous places. Unfortunately, the editor is very buggy, with many formatting errors and frequent data loses. You can just disable the WYSIWYG plugin, but some of my users still prefer it. So I ended up enabling it and then carefully hacking the many places in TWiki where it assumes that you want the WYSIWYG editor, even if you say you don't.

Despite these clumsy attempts to support "Enterprises collaboration" TWiki has been notably deficient in the features an enterprise would look for, such as time zone support, use of a DBMS as a back end, a stable API, and a practical query language.

This last deficit was actually remedied in 4.2, which is one reason I upgraded. But the main reason was LDAP-over-SSL support, another enterprise feature TWiki only recently acquired — and which the company I work for requires me to have. Unfortunately, this version includes a major refactoring of the user authentication API. Not a bad thing in itself (and probably necessary for the LDAP thing), but it eliminated the object used to encapsulate user information! Not surprisingly, a bunch of plugins have been broken by this change.

If I ever have occasion to install another wiki, it won't be TWiki. I'll take the time to educate myself about one that still understands that wikis are about keeping things simple. That doesn't mean the software itself isn't complex, just that the complexity is hidden from the end users, and is structured in such a way that administrators and developers don't have to cope with a lot of spaghetti logic.

Will Sun take back their servers? (2, Interesting)

otis wildflower (4889) | more than 5 years ago | (#25555995)

After RTFA it appears that Sun donated a few servers to host twiki.. Will they be taking them back now that the arrangement has changed (or will the venture folks end up paying for them)?

Either way, pretty stupid way of doing things, worse than XFree86 even, especially for a GPL project...

Welcome to the new economy (1)

Bill_the_Engineer (772575) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556001)

With less money to throw around, VCs will expect some immediate payoff for any investment they make in a project.

I hate to sound like a troll, but it looks like we may see the end of a marriage between what we believe an open source projects should look like and the venture capitalists that fund them.

I still think open source will continue to thrive in the government/academic markets. It's just experiencing a little push back from commercial capital...

Re:Welcome to the new economy (3, Informative)

zaliv (1396359) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556059)

A clarification: TWiki has never received any funding, let alone by a venture capitalist. This has been a takeover out of the blue.

Re:Welcome to the new economy (1)

Bill_the_Engineer (772575) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557705)

TWiki has never received any funding, let alone by a venture capitalist.

Sorry, I was confused by the summary which called twiki.net a startup and states (emphasis mine):

Is it a sensible move for a venture capital firm that depends on a healthy Open Source community to lock it out?"

My comment was an answer to the question asked within the summary...

Re:Welcome to the new economy (1)

heikkile (111814) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556437)

I hate to sound like a troll, but it looks like we may see the end of a marriage between what we believe an open source projects should look like and the venture capitalists that fund them.

Not all Open Source projects are funded by venture capital! I work for a small company that has several Open Source projects out there, and has never had outside capital. We've had our bad times, but at the moment we are expanding slowly, and the future does not look too bad.

(And yes, we use Twiki internally, and I got the "relaunch" mail. Sounded like they wanted "strong branding" that was "not compatible with Debian". Pity, but if that is the way it goes, I will need to find another Wiki system for us, and probably convert all our data - won't let any single application dictate what distro I should use. )

Re:Welcome to the new economy (1)

OliverKrueger (1396253) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557687)

As far as I understand Peter Thoenys comments on Debian, this was related to the governance model of the Debian project. To cite Tom Barton (ceo of twiki.net): "TWiki is not ready for a democratic approach."

Technically the software formerly known as TWiki is very well compatible with Debian. Sven Dowideit for example puts alot of effort into the maintance of deb packages.

Re:Welcome to the new economy (1)

Bill_the_Engineer (772575) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557851)

Not all Open Source projects are funded by venture capital!

I understand this, I was answering the question given in the summary:

Is it a sensible move for a venture capital firm that depends on a healthy Open Source community to lock it out?

My comment was for the relationship between VCs and OSS, not for all OSS. Basically if an OSS project needed external funding, governmental/academic sources should remain stable despite the reluctance for long-term funding from commercial capital.

Sorry for the confusion.

Re:Welcome to the new economy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25557041)

I hate to sound like a troll, but it looks like we may see the end of a marriage between what we believe an open source projects should look like and the venture capitalists that fund them.

Dude, it's *one* project, with a "business" run by *two* stupid suckers.

Hardly the end. Just a ripple.

ow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25556033)

Could you please fix the broken URL in my attribution for this story? Thanks :-)

Wrong logs (5, Informative)

nuddlegg (1076483) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556091)

The logs in the posting above are not so interesting. If you need the logs of the way this was communicated to the TWiki community then have a look at http://twikifork.org/pub/Fork/TWikiReleaseMeeting2008x10x27/twiki_release_2008_10_27.log [twikifork.org]

Re:Wrong logs (0)

u38cg (607297) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556185)

--- Log opened Mon Oct 27 17:55:35 2008
17:55 -!- gmc [n=gmc@freenode/sponsor/gmc] has joined #twiki_release
17:55 -!- Irssi: #twiki_release: Total of 7 nicks [0 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 7 normal]
17:55 -!- Irssi: Join to #twiki_release was synced in 0 secs
19:02 -!- CDot1 [n=crawford@crawfordcurrie.plus.com] has joined #twiki_release
19:03 -!- CDot1 changed the topic of #twiki_release to: http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/GeorgetownReleaseMeeting2008x10x27 [twiki.org]
19:34 -!- FranzJosefGigler [n=chatzill@chello084115142036.6.graz.surfer.at] has joined #twiki_release
19:45 -!- FranzJosefGigler [n=chatzill@chello084115142036.6.graz.surfer.at] has left #twiki_release []
19:45 -!- EugenMayer [n=EugenMay@dslb-092-074-254-018.pools.arcor-ip.net] has joined #twiki_release
19:45 Hello
19:46 CDot1: are you arround?
19:48 What time is it in London?
19:49 19:42 i guess
19:49 its 20:42 in .nl
19:49 so it starts in 10min?
19:49 think so yes.. but we just had wintertime.. so it might all be a mess.. lets check the world clock
19:49 i believe cdot is having dinner atm btw
19:50 daylight saving just changed here, too. Thats why Im asking. :)
19:51 ah.. ntpd was not running.. it's 8:51 here :)
19:52 7 mins,... gone forever... ;)
19:52 19:51 in london indeed, according to the/a world clock
19:52 -!- TomBarton [n=TomBarto@63.146.69.17] has joined #twiki_release
19:54 Hi Tom
19:55 Hi Marcus
19:55 Hi Tom.
19:55 Hello
19:57 So the meating starts in some minutes or am i wrong?
19:58 you're not wrong, unless i am too
19:58 -!- Lavr_ [n=donotlik@cpe.atm2-0-103309.0x3ef3d076.albnxx13.customer.tele.dk] has joined #twiki_release
19:58 i used the "meating" word again
19:58 -!- SopanShewale [n=chatzill@123.252.224.74] has joined #twiki_release
19:59 :)
19:59 hi andre, crawford, eugen, koen, kenneth, oliver, sopan, sven, tom, markus
19:59 i mean, whats wrong? it sounds the same :)
19:59 Hi Peter
19:59 Hi Peter.
19:59 who is actually at the keyboard?
19:59 Kenneth is
19:59 * gmc Markus is set to "away".
20:00 so as CDot
20:00 i'll be mostly in lurking mode though, i've caught a bug again
20:01 Im busy with some kinosearch issues, too. Please shout, if you want me to comment on something.
20:01 -!- will_t1 [n=wii_t1@63.146.69.17] has joined #twiki_release
20:01 hi will
20:02 who will be facilitating? who will be taking notes?
20:03 proposed agenda items are posted at http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/GeorgetownReleaseMeeting2008x10x27 [twiki.org]
20:03 # 1. Review Urgent Bugs - for TWiki 4.2.4
20:03 # 2. Feature requests for Georgetown Release
20:03 i would like to start with a new agenda item
20:03 ---++ Relaunch TWiki.org Project
20:04 http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/RelaunchTWikiOrgProject [twiki.org]
20:04 please review, i also sent this content to twiki-dev and twiki-announce
20:05 Did you change the default skin?
20:05 yes
20:05 that is one of the changes
20:05 looks a lot better. Not perfect, but years better.
20:06 once arthur's twiki.org specific skin is ready we can change it to his
20:07 -!- MichaelDaum__ [n=micha@dslb-082-083-134-003.pools.arcor-ip.net] has joined #twiki_release
20:07 PeterThoeny_: just to get one point, t.n. is not heading to follow the debian licence model for projects, because there are believes, the trademark can then not be protected by t.n?
20:08 just one question peter, this is it now? either go with t.n or not?
20:08 Are there any news related to the "negotiations" between t.n. and "us"?
20:08 here now; was eating supper, sorry
20:08 Hi CDot.
20:09 hi crawford
20:09 the AgreeToTermsOfUse links is broken btw
20:09 OliverKrueger, yes
20:09 -!- MichaelDaum__ is now known as MichaelDaum
20:09 Hi Michael
20:09 let's use the first part of this meeting as a q&a on the new governance model
20:09 I mean, you are using a chart to show up, that ubuntus way must be the better one, because there are more downloads. But this is missing a fact, that ubuntu is more likely a desktop solution while debian is more likely one for the server ( what is interesting for us mostly ) . So thats why downloads for ubuntu are raising ( linux just spreads more and more ) but linux has its place in the server-world for a long time.
20:09 -!- GilmarSantosJr [n=GilmarSa@189.104.195.136] has joined #twiki_release
20:09 kenneth: how much time do you need for bugs review and feature proposals?
20:10 hi gilmar!
20:10 0. There is no point
20:10 Hi Kenneth, hi Gilmar
20:10 (Hello all together)
20:10 hi everybody
20:10 ok, let's spend some time discussing the change
20:12 -!- Lynnwood [n=lynnwood@twiki/developer/lynnwood] has joined #twiki_release
20:12 hi lynnwood
20:12 greetings all
20:12 Hi
20:12 thanks koen, i fixed the link to agreetotermofuse
20:13 wow, we never had such good turnout at a release meeting!
20:14 * OliverKrueger will need a few mins to read the ToU.
20:14 So in summary. The elected interim governance team is discarded by TWiki.net, The BDFL is back, we have to accept TWiki.nets terms of use, TWiki will not be lead by an association.
20:15 correction: s/twiki.net/twiki.org/
20:15 please take your time to read the new content
20:15 I guess, this will be another very short meeting then.
20:16 No this is TWiki.net's terms of use. We did not agree on this as a community. All the vandalism you did on TWiki.org is a dictate.
20:16 seems that way.
20:16 We definitely do not believe that complete democratization is the best approach, but there may be a role for an association in the future. I think the association point is the least of our worries though
20:16 PeterThoeny_: i still wait for an answer though.
20:16 To all. This was not discussed with the Interim Board of Directors _AT ALL_
20:17 eugen, could you restate your question, i am not sure i understand
20:17 These changes have been made just a minute before this meeting started.
20:18 PeterThoeny_: t.n. is not going to support / bring us a licence which respects debians way of "open source projects" because t.n. fears / feals, they cannot protect _their_ trademark then?
20:18 "Peter Thoeny, the Founder of the project, and TWIKI.NET, collectively own the trademarks to the TWiki project, who have the sole discretion in decisions related to these matters.
20:18 i don't think this is a constructive proposal by twiki.net
20:18 "
20:18 At this point the TWiki.org project does not recognize the authority of the interim governance council
20:18 TomBarton: ask yourself, does the community recognize the authority of twiki.net ?
20:19 Why did you do that?
20:19 the beautiful thing about open source is you don't need to recognize the authority of TWiki.net!
20:19 eugen: the main reason to not go with the debian approach is my believe that it is not beneficial to the twiki project, but the ubuntu is: http://twiki.org/p/pub/Codev/RelaunchTWikiOrgProject/debian-ubuntu-s.png [twiki.org]
20:19 the tm question is secondary
20:19 and ask yourself, who is the community, if the the people showing up here every day.
20:19 gmc: thats a bad question, we are not here to fight that way i think, though i fully understand your feelings.
20:19 to explain ourselves, our reasoning was pretty simple
20:20 we just didn't think that the twiki project was moving in the right direction
20:20 i repeat PeterThoeny_, you chart is useless because :
20:20 mean, you are using a chart to show up, that ubuntus way must be the better one, because there are more downloads. But this is missing a fact, that ubuntu is more likely a desktop solution while debian is more likely one for the server ( what is interesting for us mostly ) . So thats why downloads for ubuntu are raising ( linux just spreads more and more ) but linux has its place in the server-world for a long time.
20:20 s/the/not/
20:20 TomBarton, but we did all of the coding!
20:20 and we didn't think that the problems in the community were solveable with a totally democratic approach
20:20 and the code is free - michael - you are entitled to it under the GPL
20:20 TomBarton: but the community itself believes so.
20:20 again, the beautiful thing about open source
20:21 eugen: i am referring to the governance, not the use of software
20:21 I think I just saw the ugly face of open source.
20:21 If this is what you want, why didnt you tell us at the summit?!
20:21 There is no beauty in T.N's recent moves.
20:21 absolutely not
20:21 fair question oliver - at the summit, we genuinely wanted to avoid a fork
20:21 iam not fully with you MichaelDaum, i like the skin :)
20:22 yes.. the Skin is good
20:22 This has nothing to do with skins.
20:22 however, after a lot of reflection as to what is best for the project, and of course for twiki.net, we changed course
20:22 EugenMayer: The skin was there before.
20:22 It was a joke(@all)
20:22 i know that people will probably not believe us, but we believe that we have the best interests of the project at heart (not just twiki.net)
20:23 I do not believe you, frankly.
20:23 TomBarton, I would never have contributed years of my life working on ubuntu.
20:23 I believe you have the best interests of twiki.net at heart, and nothing else.
20:23 i second that
20:24 Sorry Tom and Peter, you just discarded nearly anthing the _community_ has worked from the summit ( even the council ), you discarded what they agreed and voted on and put your opinion and believes above all that heads and you want us to like that. That is, not to be to harsh, ignorant.
20:24 you guys are definitely entitled to your opinions, but I maintain that the project was mired with infighting and wasn't going to work
20:24 are you going to work on the current codebase on your own from now on?
20:25 i would like to second tom's remark on twiki.net working for the project, i made a promise in june last year, and we executed all along: http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/TWikiDotNet#PeterStatement22Jul2007 [twiki.org]
20:25 TomBarton: i believe you don't have a proper perspective on what caused the infighting in the first place, your proposal shows this..
20:25 we invite any and all developers (including you should that unlikely event occur!) to continue with the project
20:25 TomBarton: not that i blame you, you are relatively new to the project
20:25 not that i'm an old-timer for what it matters..
20:26 "should that unlikely event occur" what do you mean?
20:26 sorry - was a lame attempt at humor, but the point is genuine, we would like people to continue with the project
20:26 I personally cannot continue under these conditions. I am sorry.
20:26 But, Tom, don't you see how unlikely this is.
20:27 Most most most probably, all will just leave.
20:27 and you are on your own with your business plan
20:27 some people will continue, I'm sure.
20:27 don't you think you have put TWiki.net in a very dangerous position?
20:28 I hope that's not the case Michael - although I would not be surprised if some people decide it's not for them. we also think that things might change over time of course
20:28 I just looked twiki.org before the meeting and I'm scared about all this
20:28 very very disapointed
20:28 Gilmar, we are all scared about the ignorance of twiki.net
20:28 Tom, so you propose to us, that we fork?
20:28 why don't you?
20:29 why now?
20:29 I think actions like that just put people away from the project
20:29 the main focus is the twiki mission, roadmap and charter, http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/TWikiCharter [twiki.org]
20:29 of course we don't propose that you fork. but you are free to do so.
20:29 your actions appear designed to force exactly that
20:29 Oh, ne words.
20:29 *new
20:30 of course we are able to fork. thats part of open source. but you havent left much of a choice to us using this shock therapy
20:30 i fully agree with CDot
20:30 Tom, this is killing TWiki.
20:31 and with it TWiki.net
20:31 i don't think so. i actually think it's the only thing that will save it
20:31 So you used the time from the summit till now to keep us waiting to have your time to change the project the way ( FORCED ) to try to keep as many as possible pepole to t.o. when the others fork. Well, thats a kindly move.
20:31 Is there anything left to say?
20:32 no - we actually were on a path toward negotiating, but changed our minds after careful review of the letter from the Interim Governance team (which came a few weeks after the summit)
20:33 you even gave us a very positive reply in the meantime. "very likely that we accept" etc
20:33 that's sad to hear
20:33 Ok, so this is what you do. Your position now is, accept the terms or leave, no further discussion i guess, right tom?
20:33 but somehow not much of a surprise :(
20:33 michael, at the time, I meant that. (sorry if it's hard to believe). our strategy change was very recent
20:33 obviously emotions are running high, i would ask that everybody takes time to review the new material to make an informed decision
20:33 i am open to questions now on irc, e-mail or phone
20:34 there is very little there that is new
20:34 Well. We are all basically being kicked out.
20:34 Lavr_: jap.
20:34 Unless we say "Heil Peter".
20:34 that appears to be the bottom line.
20:35 This is the end of TWiki as I know it.
20:35 true
20:35 tbh, after this action I have lost all the trust I had (slowly been rebuilding since the summit) in Peter.
20:35 No doubt
20:35 Yep. The question now is - what name do we give the fork?
20:35 TPFKATDO
20:35 I LIKE THIS
20:35 what is this?
20:35 I'm sure we can come up with something good.
20:35 The Project formerly know as TWiki Dot Org
20:36 CDot1: finally even i will start to contribute.
20:36 EugenMayer: no! spare us! ;-)
20:36 NO! :)
20:36 so, i guess this meeting is over and the community reconvenes somewhere else?
20:36 I will "officelize" you :)
20:37 PeterThoeny_, TomBarton: how will you handle our code when we go away? Will it still be there?
20:38 of course! we will continue to fully comply with the GPL etc.
20:38 the point is to give many people the chance to contribute to the twiki project that has a web 2.0 focus
20:39 does web2.0 develop itself?
20:39 ugc ;)
20:40 we just had RansRajah registering on twiki.org, agreeing to the terms of use: http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Main/RansRajah [twiki.org]
20:41 congrats
20:41 That mist be the new web2.0 guy
20:41 PeterThoeny_: well i wish you and RansRajah a lot of luck with your new course
20:41 thank you!
20:41 good luck on this boat people, best wishes.
20:41 bye
20:41 -!- EugenMayer [n=EugenMay@dslb-092-074-254-018.pools.arcor-ip.net] has left #twiki_release ["Konversation terminated!"]
20:42 I don't think there is any more to discuss here.
20:42 -!- CDot1 [n=crawford@crawfordcurrie.plus.com] has left #twiki_release []
--- Log closed Mon Oct 27 20:42:57 2008

Re:Wrong logs (1)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557993)

was the link posted by GP not sufficient?

Re:Wrong logs (1)

u38cg (607297) | more than 5 years ago | (#25558107)

There was a time on /. (before tabbed browsing) when the entire contents of TFA would show up in the first few comments, obviating the tedious necessity of clicking a link. I miss those days.

Re:Wrong logs (4, Interesting)

u38cg (607297) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556483)

Sorry, last post ate the nicks. Try again:

--- Log opened Mon Oct 27 17:55:35 2008
17:55 -!- gmc [n=gmc@freenode/sponsor/gmc] has joined #twiki_release
17:55 -!- Irssi: #twiki_release: Total of 7 nicks [0 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 7 normal]
17:55 -!- Irssi: Join to #twiki_release was synced in 0 secs
19:02 -!- CDot1 [n=crawford@crawfordcurrie.plus.com] has joined #twiki_release
19:03 -!- CDot1 changed the topic of #twiki_release to: http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/GeorgetownReleaseMeeting2008x10x27
19:34 -!- FranzJosefGigler [n=chatzill@chello084115142036.6.graz.surfer.at] has joined #twiki_release
19:45 -!- FranzJosefGigler [n=chatzill@chello084115142036.6.graz.surfer.at] has left #twiki_release []
19:45 -!- EugenMayer [n=EugenMay@dslb-092-074-254-018.pools.arcor-ip.net] has joined #twiki_release
19:45 < EugenMayer> Hello
19:46 < EugenMayer> CDot1: are you arround?
19:48 < OliverKrueger> What time is it in London?
19:49 < gmc> 19:42 i guess
19:49 < gmc> its 20:42 in .nl
19:49 < OliverKrueger> so it starts in 10min?
19:49 < gmc> think so yes.. but we just had wintertime.. so it might all be a mess.. lets check the world clock
19:49 < gmc> i believe cdot is having dinner atm btw
19:50 < OliverKrueger> daylight saving just changed here, too. Thats why Im asking. :)
19:51 < gmc> ah.. ntpd was not running.. it's 8:51 here :)
19:52 < OliverKrueger> 7 mins,... gone forever... ;)
19:52 < gmc> 19:51 in london indeed, according to the/a world clock
19:52 -!- TomBarton [n=TomBarto@63.146.69.17] has joined #twiki_release
19:54 < EugenMayer> Hi Tom
19:55 < EugenMayer> Hi Marcus
19:55 < OliverKrueger> Hi Tom.
19:55 < TomBarton> Hello
19:57 < EugenMayer> So the meating starts in some minutes or am i wrong?
19:58 < gmc> you're not wrong, unless i am too
19:58 -!- Lavr_ [n=donotlik@cpe.atm2-0-103309.0x3ef3d076.albnxx13.customer.tele.dk] has joined #twiki_release
19:58 < EugenMayer> i used the "meating" word again
19:58 -!- SopanShewale [n=chatzill@123.252.224.74] has joined #twiki_release
19:59 < gmc> :)
19:59 < PeterThoeny_> hi andre, crawford, eugen, koen, kenneth, oliver, sopan, sven, tom, markus
19:59 < EugenMayer> i mean, whats wrong? it sounds the same :)
19:59 < EugenMayer> Hi Peter
19:59 < OliverKrueger> Hi Peter.
19:59 < PeterThoeny_> who is actually at the keyboard?
19:59 < Lavr_> Kenneth is
19:59 * gmc <==
19:59 < OliverKrueger> Markus is set to "away".
20:00 < OliverKrueger> so as CDot
20:00 < gmc> i'll be mostly in lurking mode though, i've caught a bug again
20:01 < OliverKrueger> Im busy with some kinosearch issues, too. Please shout, if you want me to comment on something.
20:01 -!- will_t1 [n=wii_t1@63.146.69.17] has joined #twiki_release
20:01 < PeterThoeny_> hi will
20:02 < PeterThoeny_> who will be facilitating? who will be taking notes?
20:03 < PeterThoeny_> proposed agenda items are posted at http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/GeorgetownReleaseMeeting2008x10x27
20:03 < PeterThoeny_> # 1. Review Urgent Bugs - for TWiki 4.2.4
20:03 < PeterThoeny_> # 2. Feature requests for Georgetown Release
20:03 < PeterThoeny_> i would like to start with a new agenda item
20:03 < PeterThoeny_> ---++ Relaunch TWiki.org Project
20:04 < PeterThoeny_> http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/RelaunchTWikiOrgProject
20:04 < PeterThoeny_> please review, i also sent this content to twiki-dev and twiki-announce
20:05 < OliverKrueger> Did you change the default skin?
20:05 < PeterThoeny_> yes
20:05 < PeterThoeny_> that is one of the changes
20:05 < EugenMayer> looks a lot better. Not perfect, but years better.
20:06 < PeterThoeny_> once arthur's twiki.org specific skin is ready we can change it to his
20:07 -!- MichaelDaum__ [n=micha@dslb-082-083-134-003.pools.arcor-ip.net] has joined #twiki_release
20:07 < EugenMayer> PeterThoeny_: just to get one point, t.n. is not heading to follow the debian licence model for projects, because there are believes, the trademark can then not be protected by t.n?
20:08 < gmc> just one question peter, this is it now? either go with t.n or not?
20:08 < OliverKrueger> Are there any news related to the "negotiations" between t.n. and "us"?
20:08 < CDot1> here now; was eating supper, sorry
20:08 < OliverKrueger> Hi CDot.
20:09 < PeterThoeny_> hi crawford
20:09 < gmc> the AgreeToTermsOfUse links is broken btw
20:09 < MichaelDaum__> OliverKrueger, yes
20:09 -!- MichaelDaum__ is now known as MichaelDaum
20:09 < OliverKrueger> Hi Michael
20:09 < PeterThoeny_> let's use the first part of this meeting as a q&a on the new governance model
20:09 < EugenMayer> I mean, you are using a chart to show up, that ubuntus way must be the better one, because there are more downloads. But this is missing a fact, that ubuntu is more likely a desktop solution while debian is more likely one for the server ( what is interesting for us mostly ) . So thats why downloads for ubuntu are raising ( linux just spreads more and more ) but linux has its place in the server-world for a long time.
20:09 -!- GilmarSantosJr [n=GilmarSa@189.104.195.136] has joined #twiki_release
20:09 < PeterThoeny_> kenneth: how much time do you need for bugs review and feature proposals?
20:10 < PeterThoeny_> hi gilmar!
20:10 < Lavr_> 0. There is no point
20:10 < OliverKrueger> Hi Kenneth, hi Gilmar
20:10 < EugenMayer> (Hello all together)
20:10 < GilmarSantosJr> hi everybody
20:10 < PeterThoeny_> ok, let's spend some time discussing the change
20:12 -!- Lynnwood [n=lynnwood@twiki/developer/lynnwood] has joined #twiki_release
20:12 < PeterThoeny_> hi lynnwood
20:12 < Lynnwood> greetings all
20:12 < EugenMayer> Hi
20:12 < PeterThoeny_> thanks koen, i fixed the link to agreetotermofuse
20:13 < PeterThoeny_> wow, we never had such good turnout at a release meeting!
20:14 * OliverKrueger will need a few mins to read the ToU.
20:14 < Lavr_> So in summary. The elected interim governance team is discarded by TWiki.net, The BDFL is back, we have to accept TWiki.nets terms of use, TWiki will not be lead by an association.
20:15 < PeterThoeny_> correction: s/twiki.net/twiki.org/
20:15 < PeterThoeny_> please take your time to read the new content
20:15 < OliverKrueger> I guess, this will be another very short meeting then.
20:16 < Lavr_> No this is TWiki.net's terms of use. We did not agree on this as a community. All the vandalism you did on TWiki.org is a dictate.
20:16 < CDot1> seems that way.
20:16 < TomBarton> We definitely do not believe that complete democratization is the best approach, but there may be a role for an association in the future. I think the association point is the least of our worries though
20:16 < EugenMayer> PeterThoeny_: i still wait for an answer though.
20:16 < MichaelDaum> To all. This was not discussed with the Interim Board of Directors _AT ALL_
20:17 < PeterThoeny_> eugen, could you restate your question, i am not sure i understand
20:17 < MichaelDaum> These changes have been made just a minute before this meeting started.
20:18 < EugenMayer> PeterThoeny_: t.n. is not going to support / bring us a licence which respects debians way of "open source projects" because t.n. fears / feals, they cannot protect _their_ trademark then?
20:18 < Lavr_> "Peter Thoeny, the Founder of the project, and TWIKI.NET, collectively own the trademarks to the TWiki project, who have the sole discretion in decisions related to these matters.
20:18 < gmc> i don't think this is a constructive proposal by twiki.net
20:18 < Lavr_> "
20:18 < TomBarton> At this point the TWiki.org project does not recognize the authority of the interim governance council
20:18 < gmc> TomBarton: ask yourself, does the community recognize the authority of twiki.net ?
20:19 < MichaelDaum> Why did you do that?
20:19 < TomBarton> the beautiful thing about open source is you don't need to recognize the authority of TWiki.net!
20:19 < PeterThoeny_> eugen: the main reason to not go with the debian approach is my believe that it is not beneficial to the twiki project, but the ubuntu is: http://twiki.org/p/pub/Codev/RelaunchTWikiOrgProject/debian-ubuntu-s.png
20:19 < PeterThoeny_> the tm question is secondary
20:19 < OliverKrueger> and ask yourself, who is the community, if the the people showing up here every day.
20:19 < EugenMayer> gmc: thats a bad question, we are not here to fight that way i think, though i fully understand your feelings.
20:19 < TomBarton> to explain ourselves, our reasoning was pretty simple
20:20 < TomBarton> we just didn't think that the twiki project was moving in the right direction
20:20 < EugenMayer> i repeat PeterThoeny_, you chart is useless because :
20:20 < EugenMayer> mean, you are using a chart to show up, that ubuntus way must be the better one, because there are more downloads. But this is missing a fact, that ubuntu is more likely a desktop solution while debian is more likely one for the server ( what is interesting for us mostly ) . So thats why downloads for ubuntu are raising ( linux just spreads more and more ) but linux has its place in the server-world for a long time.
20:20 < OliverKrueger> s/the/not/
20:20 < MichaelDaum> TomBarton, but we did all of the coding!
20:20 < TomBarton> and we didn't think that the problems in the community were solveable with a totally democratic approach
20:20 < TomBarton> and the code is free - michael - you are entitled to it under the GPL
20:20 < EugenMayer> TomBarton: but the community itself believes so.
20:20 < TomBarton> again, the beautiful thing about open source
20:21 < PeterThoeny_> eugen: i am referring to the governance, not the use of software
20:21 < Lavr_> I think I just saw the ugly face of open source.
20:21 < OliverKrueger> If this is what you want, why didnt you tell us at the summit?!
20:21 < MichaelDaum> There is no beauty in T.N's recent moves.
20:21 < OliverKrueger> absolutely not
20:21 < TomBarton> fair question oliver - at the summit, we genuinely wanted to avoid a fork
20:21 < EugenMayer> iam not fully with you MichaelDaum, i like the skin :)
20:22 < SopanShewale> yes.. the Skin is good
20:22 < Lavr_> This has nothing to do with skins.
20:22 < TomBarton> however, after a lot of reflection as to what is best for the project, and of course for twiki.net, we changed course
20:22 < OliverKrueger> EugenMayer: The skin was there before.
20:22 < EugenMayer> It was a joke(@all)
20:22 < TomBarton> i know that people will probably not believe us, but we believe that we have the best interests of the project at heart (not just twiki.net)
20:23 < CDot1> I do not believe you, frankly.
20:23 < MichaelDaum> TomBarton, I would never have contributed years of my life working on ubuntu.
20:23 < CDot1> I believe you have the best interests of twiki.net at heart, and nothing else.
20:23 < gmc> i second that
20:24 < EugenMayer> Sorry Tom and Peter, you just discarded nearly anthing the _community_ has worked from the summit ( even the council ), you discarded what they agreed and voted on and put your opinion and believes above all that heads and you want us to like that. That is, not to be to harsh, ignorant.
20:24 < TomBarton> you guys are definitely entitled to your opinions, but I maintain that the project was mired with infighting and wasn't going to work
20:24 < MichaelDaum> are you going to work on the current codebase on your own from now on?
20:25 < PeterThoeny_> i would like to second tom's remark on twiki.net working for the project, i made a promise in june last year, and we executed all along: http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/TWikiDotNet#PeterStatement22Jul2007
20:25 < gmc> TomBarton: i believe you don't have a proper perspective on what caused the infighting in the first place, your proposal shows this..
20:25 < TomBarton> we invite any and all developers (including you should that unlikely event occur!) to continue with the project
20:25 < gmc> TomBarton: not that i blame you, you are relatively new to the project
20:25 < gmc> not that i'm an old-timer for what it matters..
20:26 < MichaelDaum> "should that unlikely event occur" what do you mean?
20:26 < TomBarton> sorry - was a lame attempt at humor, but the point is genuine, we would like people to continue with the project
20:26 < Lavr_> I personally cannot continue under these conditions. I am sorry.
20:26 < MichaelDaum> But, Tom, don't you see how unlikely this is.
20:27 < MichaelDaum> Most most most probably, all will just leave.
20:27 < MichaelDaum> and you are on your own with your business plan
20:27 < CDot1> some people will continue, I'm sure.
20:27 < MichaelDaum> don't you think you have put TWiki.net in a very dangerous position?
20:28 < TomBarton> I hope that's not the case Michael - although I would not be surprised if some people decide it's not for them. we also think that things might change over time of course
20:28 < GilmarSantosJr> I just looked twiki.org before the meeting and I'm scared about all this
20:28 < GilmarSantosJr> very very disapointed
20:28 < AndreU> Gilmar, we are all scared about the ignorance of twiki.net
20:28 < MichaelDaum> Tom, so you propose to us, that we fork?
20:28 < MichaelDaum> why don't you?
20:29 < OliverKrueger> why now?
20:29 < GilmarSantosJr> I think actions like that just put people away from the project
20:29 < PeterThoeny_> the main focus is the twiki mission, roadmap and charter, http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/TWikiCharter
20:29 < TomBarton> of course we don't propose that you fork. but you are free to do so.
20:29 < CDot1> your actions appear designed to force exactly that
20:29 < EugenMayer> Oh, ne words.
20:29 < EugenMayer> *new
20:30 < MichaelDaum> of course we are able to fork. thats part of open source. but you havent left much of a choice to us using this shock therapy
20:30 < GilmarSantosJr> i fully agree with CDot
20:30 < MichaelDaum> Tom, this is killing TWiki.
20:31 < MichaelDaum> and with it TWiki.net
20:31 < TomBarton> i don't think so. i actually think it's the only thing that will save it
20:31 < EugenMayer> So you used the time from the summit till now to keep us waiting to have your time to change the project the way ( FORCED ) to try to keep as many as possible pepole to t.o. when the others fork. Well, thats a kindly move.
20:31 < OliverKrueger> Is there anything left to say?
20:32 < TomBarton> no - we actually were on a path toward negotiating, but changed our minds after careful review of the letter from the Interim Governance team (which came a few weeks after the summit)
20:33 < MichaelDaum> you even gave us a very positive reply in the meantime. "very likely that we accept" etc
20:33 < gmc> that's sad to hear
20:33 < EugenMayer> Ok, so this is what you do. Your position now is, accept the terms or leave, no further discussion i guess, right tom?
20:33 < gmc> but somehow not much of a surprise :(
20:33 < TomBarton> michael, at the time, I meant that. (sorry if it's hard to believe). our strategy change was very recent
20:33 < PeterThoeny_> obviously emotions are running high, i would ask that everybody takes time to review the new material to make an informed decision
20:33 < PeterThoeny_> i am open to questions now on irc, e-mail or phone
20:34 < CDot1> there is very little there that is new
20:34 < Lavr_> Well. We are all basically being kicked out.
20:34 < EugenMayer> Lavr_: jap.
20:34 < Lavr_> Unless we say "Heil Peter".
20:34 < CDot1> that appears to be the bottom line.
20:35 < MichaelDaum> This is the end of TWiki as I know it.
20:35 < OliverKrueger> true
20:35 < CDot1> tbh, after this action I have lost all the trust I had (slowly been rebuilding since the summit) in Peter.
20:35 < EugenMayer> No doubt
20:35 < Lavr_> Yep. The question now is - what name do we give the fork?
20:35 < OliverKrueger> TPFKATDO
20:35 < EugenMayer> I LIKE THIS
20:35 < EugenMayer> what is this?
20:35 < CDot1> I'm sure we can come up with something good.
20:35 < OliverKrueger> The Project formerly know as TWiki Dot Org
20:36 < EugenMayer> CDot1: finally even i will start to contribute.
20:36 < CDot1> EugenMayer: no! spare us! ;-)
20:36 < EugenMayer> NO! :)
20:36 < gmc> so, i guess this meeting is over and the community reconvenes somewhere else?
20:36 < EugenMayer> I will "officelize" you :)
20:37 < MichaelDaum> PeterThoeny_, TomBarton: how will you handle our code when we go away? Will it still be there?
20:38 < TomBarton> of course! we will continue to fully comply with the GPL etc.
20:38 < PeterThoeny_> the point is to give many people the chance to contribute to the twiki project that has a web 2.0 focus
20:39 < EugenMayer> does web2.0 develop itself?
20:39 < OliverKrueger> ugc ;)
20:40 < PeterThoeny_> we just had RansRajah registering on twiki.org, agreeing to the terms of use: http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Main/RansRajah
20:41 < OliverKrueger> congrats
20:41 < EugenMayer> That mist be the new web2.0 guy
20:41 < gmc> PeterThoeny_: well i wish you and RansRajah a lot of luck with your new course
20:41 < PeterThoeny_> thank you!
20:41 < EugenMayer> good luck on this boat people, best wishes.
20:41 < EugenMayer> bye
20:41 -!- EugenMayer [n=EugenMay@dslb-092-074-254-018.pools.arcor-ip.net] has left #twiki_release ["Konversation terminated!"]
20:42 < CDot1> I don't think there is any more to discuss here.
20:42 -!- CDot1 [n=crawford@crawfordcurrie.plus.com] has left #twiki_release []
--- Log closed Mon Oct 27 20:42:57 2008

Theony will just alienate himself. (4, Insightful)

DragonTHC (208439) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556133)

He believes it's his project.

It is not.

It belongs to the mass of developers who contributed to it.

Happily they forked the codebase.

Sadly for Theony, no one will continue using Twiki. His actions are just bad for open source software.

Re:Theony will just alienate himself. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25557999)

Sadly for Theony, no one will continue using Twiki. His actions are just bad for open source software.

I think his actions are good for Free Software. He just removed one bad apple. (himself)

Re:Theony will just alienate himself. (4, Insightful)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#25558469)

You're making two big assumptions that don't quite work.

First, you're assuming that the fork will become an established product. Possible, but not certain. To survive, an OS project needs leadership — somebody who's willing to take a lot of time to do all the boring administration stuff that keeps any software project moving forward. From what I know about the people involved in the fork, none of them fits the bill. They all have day jobs that have little or nothing to do with TWiki. They just contribute bits and pieces of code in their spare time. Unless somebody emerges to fill the leadership role, this fork is just going to sputter and die — as most forks do.

Second, you're assuming that most of TWiki's users will immediately abandon TWiki and move to the new product. Speaking as a TWiki user, I can tell you that's not going to happen. We use TWiki to maintain corporate applications that have to be reliably available. We can't afford to shift to an unproven new product, even if it uses the same code base. Most users will take a wait-and-see attitude, and maybe shift once the fork proves itself.

Here are possible outcomes, in rough order of probability.

  • Both TWiki and the fork wither and die, TWiki from a lack of contributers, the fork from a lack of leadership. That's kind of a pain for those of us who use TWiki, but it's not the end of the world. There are a huge number of OS wiki products. Retooling to use one of them is something I would avoid as long as possible, but which might well pay dividends in the long run, since TWiki is not that great a piece of software.
  • Theony's VC partners give him money to hire paid help, and that keeps TWiki alive. How good that is for TWiki users depends on how much they restrict the new code. Most of us just can't afford to pay for this kind of software, so if key features become proprietary, we'll jump ship — maybe to the fork, but more likely to another wiki.
  • TWiki dies and the fork takes its place. Easiest for users like me (though not necessarily the best outcome!), but extremely unlikely.

Depended, past tense (4, Insightful)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556139)

Now the really hard, expensive part of development is done, the open source community is no longer needed. Now corporate drones can be hired to fix bugs and run the program into the ground with ill-executed new functionality.

Re:Depended, past tense (1)

JasterBobaMereel (1102861) | more than 5 years ago | (#25558011)

Meanwhile the fork maintained by the bulk of the original developers (the community) will carry on under a different name while the original will be shunned and will wither and die ...

Re:Depended, past tense (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25558179)

Functionality nobody will buy.

New T&C's make no sense. (2, Informative)

Hozza (1073224) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556205)

In the new T&C's for the "relaunched" Twiki it includes the following:

Derivative works

All GPLed content can of course be freely be redistributed and copied, as long as the TWiki trademark rights are maintained.

TWiki.org website content contributed by an individual is copyrighted by the contributing author. The collective work of the TWiki.org website is copyrighted by TWiki.org and may not be copied without written approval from the TWiki Community Council.

Are those 2 conditions even legal?

Re:New T&C's make no sense. (1)

mea37 (1201159) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556489)

"Are those 2 conditions even legal?"

I don't see anything illegal about them, but can you elaborate on why you think they may not be?

Question assumes the answer (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556237)

Is it a sensible move for a venture capital firm that depends on a healthy Open Source community to lock it out?

Of course, the question presumes the answer. If, in fact, the VC firm depends on a healthy Open Source community, it shouldn't lock it out. The real question is does the VC firm (or, as I think would more accurately state the case here, the VC-funded firm) actually rely on that, or is it viable for them to operate without it?

Re:Question assumes the answer (1)

zaliv (1396359) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556415)

We are seeing the trend that large organizations that want to employ a collaboration platform are informing themselves on the health and working of the community. So: no, it is not viable without a healthy community.

irc log (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25556393)

MayerEugen what the hell is wrong with the VI under freebsd.. [23:57]
*** sayotte joined the channel [23:57]
sayotte sayotte groans [23:58]
uebera|| MayerEugen: emacs is your friend... :p [23:58]
MayerEugen emacs is not my friend at all. !!!! [23:58]
uebera|| Ah, I see... you're one of "them"... ;)

They cut if off just when it was getting good...

Serious issues with this project (4, Insightful)

rapiddescent (572442) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556561)

I was in the market for a wiki engine for a top-100 UK company. It seemed, during the investigation phase, that twiki was too good to be true - until we found that the founder and main contributor polluted just about every forum with "use twiki" messages whether it was sensible or not. It met our shortlist and so we installed it, but, it didn't meet our criteria on usability, administration and we found it to be quite slow. I think the 'founder' had raised expectations a little too high on all those forums he posted to...

Certainly, we now have an open source policy that looks into the organisation of the hosting project to look out for these sorts of shenanigans before we use it. Certainly, I think the twiki situation is more about the personality of the 'founder' than anything and I would steer clear of a project that is behaving like this until the project board are more stabilised. it's happened before, and it will happen again.

We went with mediawiki and its been a real success and culture changing event for the organisation - encouraging some of the staff to send in fixes and create extensions to be shared with the community. The success of mediawiki software and the mediawiki project as a whole has now opened up the discussion on Linux, JBoss and other open source platforms in this once closed-source-only organisation.

Go With The Flow Or Don't (1, Flamebait)

DynaSoar (714234) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556569)

"Is it a sensible move for a venture capital firm that depends on a healthy Open Source community to lock it out?"

They didn't. TFA states several moved to the new project with the VC. Since there's a backer, they should be able to say what they support. If they wish to change, they can. If others want to change with them, they can, and have. If others don't want to, simply because the backer closed the old project, they don't have to. They don't have to grow up and accept the fact they'd been participating in a VC funded project either. But both would be beneficial. Nothing is stopping the others from continuing the old project unfunded except wasting time whining about it.

Mambo/Joomla anyone? (5, Insightful)

Qbertino (265505) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556721)

Rule Number 1: NEVER get pissy with the majority of main core contributers. If the project has *any* significance at all, you WILL lose. And for very good reasons (and riddance) too. That's a fact. Learn it.

Poor decision... (4, Informative)

mr.dreadful (758768) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556799)

This happened a few years ago with Mambo. The company that started Mambo alienated the development community and the developers all left and started Joomla. Today Joomla seems much more robust and viable then Mambo. Twiki.net has a poor road in front of it...

Cheeky (slightly off topic/topic hijack...) (1)

shic (309152) | more than 5 years ago | (#25556807)

I've recently been fiddling with Twiki, and looking at structured wikis in general.

I've been looking at ways to build collaborated structured data... where the structure of the data (i.e. the sort of fields that need to be filled in) evolves over time - and where some form of editorial control can allow the reliability of data to improve over time... or, at least, allow several people to come to agree on the same false data.

I've not been getting very far very quickly - though Drupal is showing some promise. Have other Slashdotters tried to address this problem? What software did you find most useful?

To put it back on topic, if the TWiki team go off to build the structured collaborative tool I hoped TWiki would be from the outset... I'm in favour of whatever restrictions they see fit.

Slimy & Stupid (1)

Ideally Nowhere (1384225) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557033)

Reputation is everything when you're not the only player in the game. Really, why would anybody create bad-blood and eliminate their CORE (and free) developer base? It boggles the mind.

Monetizing Open Source (1)

sbeckstead (555647) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557585)

This sounds like a perfectly good way to make money...
The first dose is free...
Then take it closed when it's gotten popular.

The only good time to do this... (3, Interesting)

Kjella (173770) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557757)

...or perhaps less bad time, is if you've written so much of the source you can actually rip out any outside contribution, change the license and go down a different road. If you did then it's your project anyway, and nobody promised you'd keep releasing code forever. This on the other hand, sounds like suicide:

20:37 PeterThoeny_, TomBarton: how will you handle our code when we go away? Will it still be there?
20:38 TomBarton of course! we will continue to fully comply with the GPL etc.

So... this will continue to be a GPL project, which means the new community will be free to take any of the VCs improvements and they'll be fighting a GPL project that has most of the previous developers on board? I think that VC might as well flush those money down a toilet or give them to me, either would be a better use of them.

TWIKI (2, Interesting)

TomTraynor (82129) | more than 5 years ago | (#25557953)

Is it just me or does anyone else remember Buck Rogers from the 70's? The robot character was Twiki... I wonder if that show got a trademark on 'TWIKI' and if so, what would happen to the TWIKI.NET trademark?

Re:TWIKI (1)

mea37 (1201159) | more than 5 years ago | (#25558325)

"I wonder if that show got a trademark on 'TWIKI' and if so, what would happen to the TWIKI.NET trademark?"

Nothing at all would happen to the TWiki.net trademark. A trademark on a character name in a television show would not be in conflict with a trademark for a piece of software, just like the trademark of a music label is not (generally) in conflict with the trademark for a type of home computer.

Re:TWIKI (1)

OrangeTide (124937) | more than 5 years ago | (#25558467)

My old copy of Twiki had that robot character in the logo. I didn't know what it was when I first saw it and had to look it up.

A naming trend? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25557973)

I was going to suggest uwiki ('u' comes after 't') for the new name and it turns out it was taken. swiki is taken also. I wonder how many of these '?wiki' names are already used?

The VCs obviously think so... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25558451)

If the investors felt any need to get help from the community, they wouldn't have locked the community out.

My experience with VCs has seen them:

  • Ignore the product's inventors who had decades of practical experience in implementation
  • Uproot a company across country, losing the entire technical staff in the process
  • Run the startup at a loss for 5 years, then wash-out the original investors (means the original investors got pennies in return for $100K investments)
  • Generally act like idiots who want to be lied to

Their first MO seems to be to rebuild the company from the ground up with "their people." This can avoid lots of personality conflicts based on "new guys vs old guys," I think /. can supply the counterpoint argument here.

Small wonder that their conversion to profit rate is 5%.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...