Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

cancel ×

348 comments

What's wrong with Santa Claus (5, Funny)

Harmonious Botch (921977) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958506)

I'm pissed. I'm disgusted. Santa is in dire need of some improvements. When he brings all the presents, he does it in the middle of the night, so I have to wait until the morning to get them. When I do get up in the morning to see what I got, all that trashy wrapping paper is in the way, delaying my enjoyment.
Also he drinks all the milk and eats all the cookies!

People.. the same as any community (5, Informative)

EmbeddedJanitor (597831) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958898)

It is very easy to say that FOSS communities are broken, but they depend on people, which are inherently broken.

The major difference between FOSS and other communities are that the people in a FOSS community share far fewer specific goals than other communities. Some people want something fixed **now**. Others want it fixed **properly**, no matter how long that takes. Others just piss and moan.

Re:People.. the same as any community (2, Funny)

Moofie (22272) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959402)

"which are inherently broken."

Speak for yourself. I'm just fine, thank you!

Re:People.. the same as any community (5, Insightful)

killjoe (766577) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959632)

Alas the pissers and moaners get most attention while the people doing the coding get pissed on.

Sad really.

Re:What's wrong with Santa Claus (1)

GodGell (897123) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959428)

Oops, accidentally modded you Offtopic - I hope replying to a post still removes moderation...

Re:What's wrong with Santa Claus (0, Offtopic)

s16le (963839) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959560)

Santa is a shitty software developer and is in denial about it.

Common sense says (4, Insightful)

Josh (2625) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958556)

Good leader > no leader >> bad leader

Nothing in this piece convinces that common sense is wrong.

Re:Common sense says (4, Interesting)

miu (626917) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958738)

The piece seems to be claiming that good > mediocre > no > bad leader.

That's somewhat true, certain kinds of software and features just won't get done without a leader. That nifty little project doesn't need a leader, it'll get done because personal motivation is enough to get it done and it's small enough that a single person can handle the entire workload. Boring stuff won't get done no matter how grand the end result unless there is a leader to make sure it gets done, no one digs ditches for fun - even if the end result will be the panama canal.

I can pay the coder to do it. (4, Interesting)

khasim (1285) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959062)

Yep, the boring stuff doesn't get done unless there's incentive to do.

A leader without the ability to fire someone or give them a pay raise isn't going to be able to provide much incentive.

But with FOSS, I (the end user) can email the coder and offer to pay him/her to finish a feature I'd like or do some other boring job. And that is one of the great things about FOSS. Once I pay for it, everyone benefits from it (including me).

Try doing that with closed source products. You can't even find out the names of the coders working on it, much less contract them directly.

Re:I can pay the coder to do it. (2, Insightful)

Zonnald (182951) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959400)

Firstly, offering to pay does not guarantee that he/she will be in a position to drop everything and take up your offer. There are opportunity costs. I for one would not give up my day job to take twice the pay to finish a feature over 1 or 2 weeks.
Secondly, you can contact most software companies and they will finish a feature. They would more than likely take payments to customize the system to include the feature. It probably wouldn't cost too much if they can see an ongoing benefit to their current and future customer base.

Remember: Microsoft is not the only proprietary software company.

Re:I can pay the coder to do it. (1)

Morphine007 (207082) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959588)

myes, the Canadian government wanted to contract Microsoft to extend support on Windows NT (cuz upgrading a network of server farms across the country is a pain in the ass)... Microsoft said "sure, for $20 million a month" ... so now we're upgrading. It would have really sucked if we were using a FOSS product where 1/20th of that would get us a couple of developers to maintain the damned thing for us instead of upgrading a system that was meeting our needs perfectly.

Re:I can pay the coder to do it. (1)

Morphine007 (207082) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959610)

oh shit... I forgot the quotation marks around "upgrading" and the heavy use of the <sarcasm> tags... my bad...

And I will wait for someone else to pay ... (3, Insightful)

AHumbleOpinion (546848) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959628)

But with FOSS, I (the end user) can email the coder and offer to pay him/her to finish a feature I'd like or do some other boring job. And that is one of the great things about FOSS. Once I pay for it, everyone benefits from it (including me).

However progress will be slow because most of us will wait for someone else to pay for the changes we want. Most people will freeload if given the opportunity, Econ 101. Since you are reading this right now, I will thank you in advance for your future gifts to the community. ;-)

What's their point? (1)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959352)

I think the article tries to have a point but fails short even if they may be right. FOSS projects do need a strong leader if they are going to do well. Projects without strong leadership go all over and tend to die or splinter. Just having any leader is not an improvement over no leader though. Neither is having any vision instead of a good vision. The vast majority of PHB projects are never completed or never go anywhre commercially. Mostly because the people in charge are bad leaders or have a bad vision. FOSS projects are evolution at work - what works continues on and what doesn't eventually dies off. Having good leadership just creates a nexus around which the project can grow and take direction. Most FOSS leaders don't know exactly where their project is going but they help to recognize the good and cut out the bad sooner rather than later. The best leaders create other leaders around themselves which makes their project into a multiheaded beast that is difficult to kill and with the ability to have multiple, but coherent, visions of what needs to happen for the project to evolve.

Gnome and KDE have mostly sucked because their vision was to copy features from Windows and Mac OS. They are growing away from that limited and faulty vision but I'd agree that their problem has been a lack of leadership with vision. I would not say PHB alternatives such as Windows and Mac OS have any better vision though. The problem with the desktop, and many desktop apps, is that people are locked into a metaphor and they are having trouble stepping outside that box. It'll take a strong leader with vision and major coding skills to break people out of their metaphor mind block. FOSS has a better chance to invent this future though because FOSS projects can afford to be wrong where as commercial projects usually can't.

In my opinion (5, Insightful)

ditoa (952847) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958562)

There is nothing wrong with the FOSS community, however there are a small number of very vocal people who are total assholes towards people new to things such as Linux. I am not a Linux n00b as I have been using it on and off since 1996/7 however when I first gave Gentoo a try (back in 2004 i believe) all I got was abuse when I asked for help with some things. There are a small number of groups within the FOSS community who give it a bad name, however this is the same with most communities IMHO. Ubuntu are doing a lot of good not just with their decent distribution but with a positive and helpful community as well. Infact this is probably the best thing about Ubuntu.

Re:In my opinion (5, Informative)

finiteSet (834891) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958956)

when I first gave Gentoo a try (back in 2004 i believe) all I got was abuse when I asked for help with some things.
For what it is worth, in my experience I have found the Gentoo community to be nothing but helpful. Anytime I've had a problem the answer has already been provided in the forums, or users quickly (and politely) responded to my posts. And I started learning Linux with Gentoo, so I most certainly was a "n00b." Because of my experience with the Gentoo community, forums.gentoo.org is usually my first stop when I encounter any Linux-related problem. Luckily, I have long since shed my "n00b"-skin, but I am grateful to have had access to the community during that early formative stage.

Re:In my opinion (1)

FredK (140786) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959030)

Parent has it exactly right. My experience, and from what I've read from many others, is that the Gentoo community is extremely helpful and polite.

Re:In my opinion (2, Interesting)

jman451 (830940) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959326)

I've had mixed results when asking for help in the gentoo forums, and I have found that the wording and the tone of how you ask questions is very important. An article by ESR on the proper way to ask questions http://catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html [catb.org] .

This of course begs the question, how can you expect n00b to be careful about how a question is asked? after all he is merely a n00b.

Re:In my opinion (5, Insightful)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959240)

I find the reaction to questions is entirely dependant upon how the question was asked.

A knowledgeable person who is simply inexperienced in an area will generally phrase a question better than a 12 year old kid demanding attention NOW.

"Gentoo is shit, it won't install why not?"

vs

"I attempted to install Gentoo on my computer (an aging P2 on an Acer motherboard) and came up with a number of problems during the install. It spent about 20 minutes compiling before it stopped saying 'The XYX system could not be compiled: missing file xyz.c'.
I tried looking around the furum but couldn't see where I am going wrong. Can somebody give me some assistance please?"

Re:In my opinion (5, Insightful)

mcrbids (148650) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958992)

There is nothing wrong with the FOSS community, however there are a small number of very vocal people who are total assholes towards people new to things such as Linux.

Ooops, I think you got that wrong.

There are a small number of very vocal people who are total assholes towards people.

Does it matter what the subject is?

Re:In my opinion (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16959238)

Does it matter what the subject is?

Yes, try finding the Linux/BSD abuse you get asking similar questions for a decent commercial OS like OS X.

Re:In my opinion (1)

Eric Pierce (636318) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959126)

> Ubuntu are doing a lot of good not just with their decent distribution but with a positive and helpful community as well. I agree with your Ubuntu comment. However, I also see lots of screwy advice in the forums; people too eager to help w/o really trying to understanding the root cause of a problem. All the same, I'm pretty happy w/Ubuntu's focus after running Suse and Debian since 2000. EP

Re:In my opinion (1)

Eric Pierce (636318) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959192)

[Darn HTML formatting]
> Ubuntu are doing a lot of good not just with their decent distribution but with a positive and helpful community as well.

I agree with your Ubuntu comment. However, I also see lots of screwy advice in the forums; people too eager to help w/o really trying to understanding the root cause of a problem.

All the same, I'm pretty happy w/Ubuntu's focus after running Suse and Debian since 2000.

EP

Re:In my opinion (-1, Flamebait)

CDarklock (869868) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959200)

> There is nothing wrong with the FOSS community

That's exactly what's wrong with it: the open source community does not believe that anything is wrong.

Let's look commercial closed-source projects.

- Roughly 48% of commercial projects fail
- Those that succeed take roughly fourteen months

Now let's look at open source.

- More than 99% of open source projects fail
- Those that succeed take roughly ten years

I don't know. Is there a problem there? It certainly looks that way to me.

Homer, Is That You? (1)

hahiss (696716) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959416)

"Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that."
--Homer Simpson

Re:In my opinion (1)

acidrain69 (632468) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959502)

I call BS. How many thousands of open source projects are there? And you're saying only 1 in 100 succeed? What is your definition of failure? If you were correct, there would almost be one open source project for every member of the human race.

Re:In my opinion (1)

joe 155 (937621) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959332)

I think you're right on the whole, when I first started using Linux I ran into a little of the "OMG N00Bz!!!" type thing but I did find that when I started using Fedora the people on the forum are really helpful and always have a lot of time for people (even so I have seen a couple of RTFM flames), I now like to give back because of all the help I got when I was first starting out with it and have never said any of the things that originally made me nervous about going onto linux to people, instead just being prepared to put in an extra 5 mins to say exactly how you do something in detail.

Re:In my opinion (1)

rvw (755107) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959490)

Asking questions can also be a way of giving something back, although many people don't see that. I admit that most of the time I ask questions, more than I answer. But I put a lot of effort in those questions. If I'm going to ask someone to look into my problems, I may as well give them all that I have. I report back if someone answers, and try to make it into some kind of solution that hopefully other people will find using a search engine.

The bonus is that in doing this, I make an overview of the problem, and suddenly see all kind of new ways to look at it. Quite often that is good enough to solve the problem myself.

Re:In my opinion (1)

Moofie (22272) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959420)

Let me cut out the extraneous parts of your post.

"there are a small number of very vocal people who are total assholes"

And here, my friends, you have the explanation for literally all the ills of the world. Forget FOSS, this is the truism of Life, The Universe, and Everything. There are a small number of vocal assholes. Every phenomenon of our existence is driven by that fact.

Two things that are wrong: (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16958570)

1. ESR

2. RMS

They pretty much sum up what's wrong with the OSS community.

When did the community become an entity (5, Insightful)

0racle (667029) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958574)

When did the 'FOSS community' become an entity that could be analyzed as a single group so that you could point at it saying that's what's wrong with it?

Re:When did the community become an entity (1)

kaiidth (104315) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959014)

There's a Terry Pratchett quote which, loosely paraphrased, goes something like 'Like all uses of the word `community', it gave the feeling that they were using it in a very specific case that does not include you or anybody you know'.

There's also a very active research set that delights in sending out mindless little questionnaires to evaluate this and enumerate the other features of said F/OSS community. Personally, I've long since stopped wasting time actually answering said questionnaires, and so I suspect have many people who, objectively, might be said to form part of said community. Like herding cats, this; or, more accurately, like trying to persuade busy people to fill out endless questionnaires.

When did the community become math? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16959246)

"When did the 'FOSS community' become an entity that could be analyzed as a single group so that you could point at it saying that's what's wrong with it?"

Since statistics and psychology were invented.

Re:When did the community become an entity (1)

Moofie (22272) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959458)

When people tried to start selling magazines about it.

Hmm.. (4, Insightful)

El Lobo (994537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958576)

I kind of dislike the Open Source fanosophy... Sorry, philosophy, but that article was a waste of bandwidth. Of course, in free/Open Source everyone does as they want. Yes, it's a Bazaar, but that's the way it's suposed to be. I do whatever i want in my freetime, but I must do whatever I'm told at work. And that is not going to change.And that has been so since the creation or the evolution from monkeys. And the world has not ended because of that.

Presentation is key in the professional world (0, Flamebait)

Asshat Canada (804093) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958594)

The FOSS nerds would do themselves a huge service by (at LEAST) trimming their disgisting food-speckled beards and bathing once in a while. Truly a disgusting group.

On behalf of the Open Source Community... (0)

shrtckt (1006747) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958636)

If you don't like it, then don't use it :)

what is wrong (1)

wardk (3037) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958638)

Steve and BIll don't own it. (But Novell isn't done, so that could change)

so what's wrong with it is actually what is right with it.

Re:what is wrong (5, Insightful)

ditoa (952847) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959466)

Actually lack of leadership is a problem within the FOSS. Mark Shuttleworth has done a great job with Ubuntu because he is a good businessman. Too many FOSS projects are managed by developers who don't know how to manage which means poor decisions are made. This is fine if you don't want the project to grow however if you want to become bigger and better you need to make certain choices and sometimes they are not always easy to accept. I have seen many projects (both FOSS and commercial) die because of bad decisions being made by someone who has never managed anything in their life. Just because something is free and open source doesn't mean that they cant be managed by someone with a business background. Ubuntu is a fine example of this IMHO.

Re:what is wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16959558)

Novell don't own it either. So there is nothing to be afraid of.

Ack!!!!!! (-1, Flamebait)

Otter (3800) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958646)

A few years back, Eric S. Raymond (or, as everyone else calls him, ESR), wrote a lengthy paper about this community...If business analysts are simply the ugly hunch-backed minions of the Bad Guy then who is next on the list?

Patrick -- Eric Raymond is a pompous, clunky, pandering buffoon of a writer. Modeling your prose style on his is like learning spelling from CmdrTaco.

we need artists and bug hunters (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16958648)

we need more artists in the FOSS to design icons and stuff. Also, we need folks who are willing to hunt bugs to complement those who come up with features. Instead of doing a crossword puzzles why not fix bugs in FOSS?

Nothing really is wrong except one thing. (4, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958650)

That one thing is that FOSS can not be the end all and be all of software.
Not every software need will be be solved with FOSS.

There needs to be freedom to write Open and Closed source software. That is what bugs me are people that think selling a closed source package is evil. I just don't think that the FOSS model can work for every program.

Re:Nothing really is wrong except one thing. (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958942)

Sorry, I still think telling people what they can and can't copy is wrong. And threatening to take away everything they own (cause no average person can afford to defend a copyright lawsuit) or send them to jail if they disagree with you is just evil.

Re:Nothing really is wrong except one thing. (1)

NDPTAL85 (260093) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959308)

Would that be more or less wrong then telling someone that their creation cannot be protected under law and that they must allow the entire world to profit from its free usage rendering the salability of the creation by the original author impossible?

Re:Nothing really is wrong except one thing. (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959422)

Yep, cause the right to restrict others by employing men with big guns so you can make a buck is something that we never wish to see perish from this earth.

Re:Nothing really is wrong except one thing. (1)

Moofie (22272) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959432)

If their "creation" is a physical object, it should be illegal to take it away from them. Everything else is a gray area.

F(L)OSS (2, Insightful)

Potor (658520) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958662)

Clearly, when ideological differences get in the way of even naming the community, you have a problem. Then again, having a common enemy will never be enough to guarantee harmony.

no leadership? (3, Insightful)

HAL9000_mirror (1029222) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958674)

From the article:
Unlike in the Cathedral, the Bazaar has no official leadership.

Isn't this what enables FOSS? Most of the FOSS don't have official leadership (other than the creator of course :-) ) until it matures and shines. The linux kernel is a wonderful example.

Re:no leadership? (4, Funny)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958904)

Unlike in the Cathedral, the Bazaar has no official leadership.

Sometimes that is preferable to Archbishop Balmer flinging the Holy Chair of Antioch.

Re:no leadership? (1)

DoubleRing (908390) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959226)

Sometimes that is preferable to Archbishop Balmer flinging the Holy Chair of Antioch.
You've been waiting to use that for a long time haven't you?

Re:no leadership? (1)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959654)

You've been waiting to use that for a long time haven't you?

Peter: Hey, Brian. If cops are pigs, does that make you a Snausage?

Brian: Clever. Did you stay up all night writing that?

Peter: I got to bed around 2:00, 2:30...

Re:no leadership? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16959406)

> Isn't this what enables FOSS?

It is how FOSS survives. The FOSS model is the result of natural selection. Not so much 'the survival of the fittest', but survival of the inedible. Other software development models are killed off by being absorbed by carnivores, or squashed by market elimination, or litigation, or contractual exclusion, or some other.

MS has killed off Corel Linux, litigated Lindows, pushed or paid SCO to dump SCO Linux, paid Novel to corrupt SUSE. But, like Medusa, for every head they sever two more will pop up in their place.

I read the article (5, Interesting)

matt me (850665) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958712)

I read the article, and I still couldn't tell you what it says. It talks about bazaar, and Gnome and development, but it has no content! I don't think it said *anything*. From the book: Harmless.

I challenge thee to summariser it.

This is what (/usr/bin/ots) a text summariser said (interesting to note it tents to focus on cathedral-style, bazaar-style, and gnome bashing)

A few years back, Eric S. Entitled The Cathedral and the Bazaar, he wrote about how the Free/Open Source Software (FOSS) community does what it wants when it wants to. In Cathedral-style projects, your not-so-friendly neighborhood PHB (fueled by the lies from various ugly hunch-backed minions), although wrong 120% of the time, says what goes in a project. Backed by the Free Software Foundation and the FOSS community as a whole, the GNOME project for many years just added lots and lots of feature creep and otherwise unnamed bloat.

The GNOME project lacked true vision for those years, and feature creep and other long term development problems rushed in to fill that hole. Problem is, many projects are just like GNOME. Incidentally, few Cathedral-style projects suffer from lack of vision: those that do simply die off and are never heard from again. Bazaar-style development allows projects to be in a zombie state for long periods of time, where it is vastly expensive for a Cathedral-style project to do the same. someone with vision (corrupt or not) would control a project, driving development behind it, and have the project reach goals in specific time frames.

Summary (1)

Gregory Cox (997625) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959390)

This is my attempt at a summary.

What are the problems facing FOSS Software?

One problem is that market analysts don't understand the "Bazaar-style" development model FOSS uses. Unlike software developed in a single company, with FOSS there is no boss telling developers what to do next. That means market analysts can't see the direction in which development is headed. Market analysts are important because top management types in companies listen to them.

Another problem is that FOSS projects can lack direction and vision, leading to a lack of progress. Linux is a good project because Linus controls it by choosing which patches to add. However, projects sometimes suffer from bad leadership, which stops progress (like XFree86), or unclear leadership, which leads to feature creep and no real advances (like GNOME in the past).

The solution to this problem is to have a leader controlling development, to make developers achieve definite goals within a specific time frame. In other words, FOSS projects should move closer to the "Cathedral" style of development.
In one sentence: to be successful, projects need to be managed and coordinated well. Not a very surprising conclusion.

Of course... (4, Insightful)

dedazo (737510) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958744)

Another thing that's wrong with the "community" is writing an article detailing what's wrong with the community and then bashing a project like GNOME, which for all its failings does what it needs to do, is very much active and has a large user and developer following. So I guess this guy must be a "KDE fanboy"... and so it goes.

Here's my rimshot: (4, Insightful)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958752)

The biggest problem with the FOSS community is its tolerance for whiny fuckers who can't understand that we do this for fun and you have absolutely no right to complain about something you got for free.

disagree (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16958906)

... who can't understand that we do this for fun...

Oops. There goes that "we" word again. So you are the FOSS community?

Perhaps you should have said, "I do this for fun and you have no right to complain about something I give you for free". Because there are a lot of others in this mythical community that don't have your attitude. I don't believe you speak for their projects.

Re:disagree (2, Insightful)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959022)

Well, for those people who don't do this for fun, and instead do this because they want to show the world how great they are or something, you can complain as much as you like. "I'm great." "No you're not, look at this fuck up." "What do you want for nothing?" doesn't follow, I conceed that.

Re:disagree (3, Insightful)

stubear (130454) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959312)

If you do this for fun then quit trying to foist it on everyone else. Quit trying to trick governments into developing and supporting OSS. Quit bitching about Microsoft. You guys got the commercial world interested now you have to live with the consequences.

Re:disagree (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959464)

The whole government thing is silly.. they should be developing public domain software, if they're developing any software at all. Typically the argument for government to use OSS is simply a demand for governments to spend money effectively instead of giving pork belly projects to compaign contributors. As for bitching about Microsoft, we have as much right to bitch about them as the rest of the fuckin' world.. they suck, and that is plain for everyone to see. As for getting the commercial world interested, they got interested in us, not the other way around.. unfortunately they continue to think they can apply the rules of the proprietary software world to the free software world, which, of course, is absurd.

actually yeah you can (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16959042)

First off a lot of complaining can be considered constructive criticism.

Say I give you a free tire for your car saying "it's a good tire" and you use it .. but the tire goes flat in the middle of the highway .. then what? You don't have a right to complain cause you got it free? It should meet a certain standard or you would have chosen the commercial one if the free one was crap. It would be different if you had approached me and asked me to make you a tire.

That said, I do understand the point you were making .. but there's two sides to every issue. Oh yeah btw I did appreciate the cool stuff you guys did back in the days of V.

That's all.

Re:actually yeah you can (1, Insightful)

Chaffar (670874) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959176)

Somebody go explain to others that software CANNOT, I repeat, CANNOT be compared with physical products.
While it would be convenient to those who "sell" software to convince you otherwise, don't forget that the price of replication of software is ZERO. And besides, if you don't like it, you don't die, you just have to look for a different vendor. Unlike a tire going flat in the middle of the highway :)

Re:Here's my rimshot: (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16959146)

Go back in your hole nerd!

Re:Here's my rimshot: (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16959268)

That tolerance has always been fed by a desire for mainstream acceptance by a certain portion of the community. Boosters and fanboys especially are susceptible to this, they don't have the self-discipline or knowledge to contribute anything - so instead they make unrealistic promises about what FOSS can do, attack ideological enemies of the community, and in general make asses of themselves.

The funny thing is that when these fanboys are (inevitably) disappointed by FOSS they tend to retreat either into fanaticism or rabid hatred of productive members of the community. Hell hath no fury like a fanboy scorned.

Re:Here's my rimshot: (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16959310)

you have absolutely no right to complain about something you got for free.

I'm sorry, but you have utterly failed to explain:
(1) why you have a right to complain about something you got in exchange for money, through barter, etc.
(2) why you do not have a right to complain about something that you got for free, stole, etc.

In fact, if you're willing to justify #1, then I can prove that #2 is not true by simply introducing that elementary concept known as opportunity cost. A free pile of crap in your yard is free, but it still costs you time and effort to deal with it that you could otherwise invest in a more valuable endeavor.

we do this for fun

Incomplete statement. You do it for fun and then claim that every rational person should do it to because it is better, more capable, and more bug free. You then refuse to fix identified defects and bugs by hiding behind the excuse that it is free. It never occurs to you that the time, effort, frustration, and cost expended by individuals who buy commercial software could be less than the time, effort, and frustration expended by individuals buying into your claims.

Why not advertise the entire deal? "Our software won't cost you a dime, and if you don't like it exactly as it is, fix it yourself or suck eggs."

Re:Here's my rimshot: (1)

It'sYerMam (762418) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959652)

The problem with that argument tends to be the way it is either phrased or misunderstood. It is perfectly acceptable to make a negative comment on a piece of free software. For a variety of reasons, the answer that comes back seems to easily be (mis)understood as, "We don't like anyone talking bad about our baby, now piss off and do it yourself. (Noob, RTFM, etc)." Obviously, if this understanding is a natural one, and the response was similarly defensive, then it is probable that whoever made the comment did so poorly, but nonetheless, I often find it irritating when the connotation is given that F/OSS can't stand any suggestions whatsoever, for whatever reason.

Interesting bit about XFree86 (4, Insightful)

tcopeland (32225) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958776)

> Not only did Dawes lack vision, he got in the
> way of everyone who did have vision.

That's rather well said. If you're the author of a successful open source project and you find yourself unable to keep working on it, do you have a duty to turn it over to the other developers for continued maintenance? I can't think of a reason not to, and if you don't, it'll either die or get forked, both of which aren't pleasant outcomes.

Developers who ignore users (1)

ubuwalker31 (1009137) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958780)

One of the huge problems that OSS faces is the attitude that if a user (non-developer) wants a feature, then he should work on it himself. OSS developers only seem to want to work on "pet projects" that are "fun" to code, not projects that are "boring" or seen as "difficult" or "of no interest to the developers". OSS programmers must take the time to provide features which the market, which primarily consists of non-developers, wants.

This is basic economics: provide the market with the goods it wants, or get run out of business.

Re:Developers who ignore users (3, Insightful)

shimage (954282) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958926)

This is basic economics: provide the market with the goods it wants, or get run out of business.

But they aren't selling anything ... FOSS developers code because it's fun; that's their compensation, not money. It's no excuse to be an ass, but I don't really see why they should necessarily cater to anyone that isn't contributing in a tangible way.

Re:Developers who ignore users (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16958948)

One huge problem is that users don't realize that most developers do not get paid to write free software, they only do it because it is interesting and/or fun to do. Why should they be expected to work on boring features they don't want?
Don't look a gift horse in the mouth...

Re:Developers who ignore users (1)

Thomas the Doubter (1016806) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959036)

The very wellspring of Free/Open Source Software is the enjoyment that the developers obtain from their effort. It is an arena where individual psychology takes priority over the economics of supply and demand. Of course business people have a problem understanding this - though why they spend so much time and effort practicing their putting is beyond me :-) Thomas

Re:Developers who ignore users (5, Insightful)

passthecrackpipe (598773) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959138)

This is one of the most confused responses I know of on this subject. Not your fault, I hear it frequently. I would like to clarify some things for you. There are 2 basic types of OSS devs. Those that are employed by a company with some interest in OSS, and those that do it purely for fun. The devs in the first group don't develop for end users, they develop for their company. Somehow, through some process (in which they may be involved at some point) the Company decides what they have to work on, and when it should be done. This may have some benefit for the end user, it may not - and that is totally besides the point -- for all you know these devs are hacking away at some piece of code that will never be distributed outside of the Company anyway.

While this may be OSS development in the sense that people work on OSS code, it isn't about this topic - the "FLOSS Community" and the coders that form part of this community. Those coders tend to fall in the second camp. They tend to work for reasons other then direct cash. They do it for fun, peer recognition, whatever. For the majority of these people, "non-coding end-users" are the same bunch of clusterfucks they deal with everyday during the dayjob, and tend to not feature very prominently in the motivation chain. The things that drive them are project that are "fun" to code, "pet projects" and all that kind of stuff. They have little motivation to work on projects that are "boring", "seen as difficult" or "of no interest to the developers". This camp of OSS developers "must" do nothing, and more importantly, owe you nothing.

You then bring in some muddled argumentations about the "market" and "running out of business". Unless the OSS coder in question is pretty incompetent, and gets fired from his (quite possibly non-OSS related) dayjob, there is no "business" to be run out of. Most of these projects *are* pet projects, and they only reason you can use them for free is because the coder in question has an urge to tell the world: "Look what I can do!!"

Now its time to bring market drivers / basic economics into the picture. You, as a non-coding end-user, want an application. There are some half-way-there projects out there, but non really fit your bill. You are angry because all the selfish devs only think of their pet projects and having fun. Some entrepeneur, somewhere, will know this, and hire a bunch of devs to create a project you, and hopefully many others, will pay good money for. Only now, once renumeration has entered the picture, can you speak of a market in a meaningful way. Now you are a paying customer, and you can vote with your wallet and feet.

Unless you are a cheapskate, and don't want to pay for anything, but still want every little piece of functionality handed to you "just so". If you ain't paying the cash, either do it yourself, or STFU.

Re:Developers who ignore users (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16959284)

OSS programmers must take the time to provide features which the market, which primarily consists of non-developers, wants.

If the market want something from us, give us something we can use, or at least have a little patience. Not all of us do this on some company's time, and we also have our lives to live.

You're thinking "apps", but there's more at OSS. I, for example, do drivers. I do it to scratch my own itches, and I do it for fun. I own at least one copy of everything I've developed for; now... I can afford some, but my resources aren't infinite; some hardware vendors are pretty friendly and send over examples and detailed specs of their boards.
Others, however, ignore us completely. Chips have to be reverse-engineered, devices have to be bought. And there we have the end-users screaming "device X is supported, why isn't mine? They look the same! Do your work! I want it working NOW!" - "we don't have that hardware available, sorry. You could try complaining to the manufacturer, for example" - "not my problem! Linux sucks! This works in Windows!"; yeah, I do get painful urges to completely ignore those users...

Re:Developers who ignore users (1)

chromatic (9471) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959382)

This is basic economics: provide the market with the goods it wants, or get run out of business.

This too is basic economics: provide someone with some incentive to give you the goods you want, or you won't get them.

Coming along just fine (4, Insightful)

troll -1 (956834) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958824)

Been a Unix/Linux admin for eight years. Been running slackware on laptop as my sole OS for the past five years. I've seen a lot of changes. It's never been better. Sure it's a bazaar, but isn't that how it's supposed to be? Hey, if you don't like gnome, choose something else among the dozens of choices out there.

Perhaps the real problem is the plethora of side-liners, pundits, philosophers, and magazine authors who have nothing better to do than sit around and draw erroneous conclusions. I call these people OSS arm-chair experts. We don't need 'em. Seems the people with most to say write the least amount of code. Maybe they should learn to program and get involved rather than digging too deeply into what's wrong. Be positive.

Re:Coming along just fine (1)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958924)

amen brother. if these fuckers coded as much as they critisied, OSS would be 10 years ahead of where it is now.

Re:Coming along just fine (1)

Mr. Hankey (95668) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958966)

Damn straight. I've run Linux-based operating systems since the summer of '95, and it's incredible how far the distributions have come. [k*]ubuntu and Mandriva both come with quite nice out of the box experiences even for new users, and new applications continue to increase the space where Free/OSS software can be useful. I see a lot of people complaining about why it's not ready for them, but luckily there are also plenty of people working on ensuring it will get there.

Exactly. (1)

aussersterne (212916) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959430)

The problem(s) are imagined by the professional problematizers.

I've been running Linux since 1993, alongside Windows until 2001. What we have now is a stable, fast, rapidly-evolving, feature-complete operating system that's more powerful than Windows or Mac OS and more widely compatible that anything else on the planet, all at no cost. Similar things can be said about Firefox, OpenOffice, etc.

There is nothing wrong here, FOSS has been a roaring success and continues to be one every day. The proof of the pudding, etc. It's the best game going in technology right now and I don't see that changing anytime soon. Of course if your baseline is "Any 'successful' software will have every feature and function you will ever need while at the same time staying lean and mean and user interface clean, and it will come with indemnity and warranty and a serious guarantee all while staying completely free," then yeah, FOSS falls short I suppose, but it's still a damn sight nearer than any other software development ecosystem.

someday ... (4, Funny)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958826)

Someday Linux will be replaced, someday X will be replaced, someday GNOME will be replaced.

Someday pigs will fly
Someday hell will freeze over
Someday bears will be catholic and popes will shit in the woods
Someday poeple will stop using weasel words

waste of space (2, Insightful)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958868)

the foss community is a mirror of the world in general. the people in it are no different to those in any other community. i've met the most generous and helpful people, and also the most nasty. there's nothing "wrong" with the FOSS people, it's just human nature. right and wrong are just a matter of opinion.

Wow (1)

diablo-d3 (175104) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958872)

Something I wrote finally has been Slashdotted. Thank $DEITY I'm not paying the server bills on this one.

yessss. (1)

Tei (520358) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958884)

Yes. A guy with a vision can move fast a FOSS proyect. The bazar is good, and the catedral has some nice features you can use on a FOSS proyect. So, I mostly agree TFA.

This Blog Seems to be Spot On (2)

filesiteguy (695431) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958912)

Though I may not agree with some of his details, overall he's spot on in his argument. He ascertains that the FOSS community - when lacking Cathedral-like leadership - will suffer and potentially flounder. Using the example of x.11 / x.org, he correctly summarizes what is a partial issue with FOSS.

HOWEVER - I think it is very good that such a review exists. As the benevolent dictator of my staff, I encourage ideas and help move software projects forward. I can learn from the FOSS community and their mistakes.

I certainly hope that the kernel development and many other such projects (KDE) follow this type of path.

Re:This Blog Seems to be Spot On (1)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959394)

x11 suffered from poor leadership, not lack of it.

Too violent? (5, Insightful)

NineNine (235196) | more than 7 years ago | (#16958940)

One big problem that I see if the violence inherent in the community. Everything is a "war" or a "Battle". An "OS War", a "browser war". This article is titled "inside the mind of the enemy". Community != War. If I didn't know better, I'd think that the whole OSS movement was being led by our own current war-loving government (war on drugs, war on terrorism). How about dropping the hostility, for starters?

Re:Too violent? (1)

init100 (915886) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959520)

One big problem that I see if the violence inherent in the community. Everything is a "war" or a "Battle".

I don't see that as something OSS-specific, but rather a cultural aspect of america. Many americans use words such as battle and war when discussing competition. This terminology is largely absent in other parts of the world.

Note: This post is not supposed to bash america, just highligh an aspect of american culture as viewed by a non-american.

Re:Too violent? (1)

NineNine (235196) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959590)

You're 100% right. Hell, look at the words used to describe american football (that idea is from George Carlin). We have a very violent culture.

But, what part of OSS is competitive, at all? It's people making software. The whole idea is that you shouldn't care who is using your product, so there's no competition with commercial software (or there shouldn't be). Where's the competition in OSS?

This really applies only to large projects (1)

belmolis (702863) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959018)

This article really only applies to large projects like Linux and Gnome. A large amount of FOSS is written by one person. I don't know of any statistics, but take a look at Freshmeat or at the authorship of programs that you use, and I'm pretty sure the majority will be single-author projects, or perhaps involve two or three people. This is often true of projects that list many authors - often only one or two people have worked on any program at any given time - there are a lot of authors because the project has run for a long time or consists of a number of separate pieces. Such projects are intrinsically Cathedral-style. There isn't any large group to have different visions. This isn't to say that what the author has to say isn't relevant as some large projects are very important, but a valid perspective on FOSS development has to avoid the mythology in which every project involves large numbers of people.

Frankly, the Zealots and the Software (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16959032)

My experience with most of the FOSS software (I know, redundant...) is that is usually just doesn't work the way it "should". I know that is an awfully broad brush, but in my experience it is the absolute truth. I want so badly for FOSS to take over (primarily because I do hate capitalism...well, American-style capitalism and copyright laws) but, being a Sys Admin, I can go to my boss only so many times and say, "Hey, I can save you a TON of money on this cool FREE alternative to _____!", only to have it fall apart after a few months of continuous use. I am sick abd tired of being made to look like a fool by some of
this half-@ssed written software. I'm not saying that I can write better software. I am saying, however, that it should at least work as well as the (God, if you exist please forgive me for what I am about to say.) MS piece that it is probably trying to emulate.

I don't consider myself an FOSS zealot by any stretch, but I am rooting for its success.

The open source 80% problem (1)

Animats (122034) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959190)

The big problem with open source, once you get past the major projects like Linux and Apache, is that projects get 80% done and then run into trouble. The classic troubled Sourceforge project is stuck at version 0.9 for years. The fun stuff has been done, and nobody wants to do the boring work of making it usable and maintainable, fixing the hard bugs, cleaning up the messy parts, and writing readable documentation.. Which, in commercial software, is 50% to 80% of the job.

The problem is not open source, but volunteer projects. Which is where companies like RedHat come in. They take the stuff that's almost done and put paid people on doing the boring but essential work. Which pays off for them.

Off the top of my head... (3, Insightful)

Y-Crate (540566) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959194)

- Not-Invented-Here Syndrome: Reinvent and implement what already exists because it's not 100% the way you want it to be. Why collaborate when you can just create another duplicate project that will never make it past beta or even close to feature complete?

- Users, What Users?: Coding for yourself is nice, but if you want users to flock to your app, you might want to actually consider what they want. Don't bitch and moan at them when they offer suggestions, even if said suggestions don't fit your own personal vision, or even if they are downright stupid. That doesn't mean you have to implement them, but it means you have to be weigh them equally with your own ideas. Try to be inclusive and open to your userbase. "Go code it yourself" is a great way to keep OSS in the geek ghettos of the computing world.

- But It Looks Pretty: That's a snazzy looking interface you just whipped up, is it consistent? No? Does it follow standard UI principles? No? I'm sure people won't become frustrated and dismissive of your hard work. You can say that UI standards impinge on your freedom as a developer, but they make a user's life much easier, and makes people much more likely to actually use your software.

- Ask, Don't Beg: Asking companies and organizations to open code is nice and helpful, but be careful how you go about it. It can easily come across as "The OSS community could never dream of putting something like that together. Gimme!" Don't act like you *expect* the code, and that they are evil incarnate for withholding it. Don't make it seem as if the OSS community is incompetent and needs privately-developed projects turned over wholesale to get anything accomplished. Sure it helps a whole lot, but don't make it seem as though OSS is just mooching off the investment of others.

- Vendettas: If two projects can fight over something, no matter how petty, they will. Try coding, it's more productive and makes you appear like a mature, competent project that might help win over those hesitant to support OSS. Or you could just continue the pissing matches and flamefests over icons and licensing minutiae that could probably be settled if egos were set aside for a few moments. Public wars of words, endless forking....nothing gets accomplished but the stroking of egos. Well, except the whole "OSS developers come across as immature, childish amateurs" thing.

Re:Off the top of my head... (1)

init100 (915886) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959600)

Well, except the whole "OSS developers come across as immature, childish amateurs" thing.

I think that it is quite childish to judge an entire community based on just a few people. It is about as fair as if I would judge all americans based on my impression of George W Bush och Dick Cheney.

Mildly interesting, but shallow. (4, Informative)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959196)

I don't think anything in it is wrong, as such, but it really doesn't say all that much. It sort of meanders through a few stories vaguely relating to the idea that "without an organizing vision, direction doesn't happen." But it seems to me that that while that's vaguely interesting, its not really a problem with the OSS community.

While, of course, the OSS community doesn't have a single vision for any piece of OSS software, quite a lot of OSS projects do and, as his story alludes, OSS projects that have a following but languish either for lack of vision or because the project owner has misguided vision—unlike closed-source projects which, while they may not tend to lack vision, are no less likely to have a misdirected vision than their open-source counterparts—can be rescued by forking.

And plenty of OSS projects do have a vision, direction, roadmap, etc. Sure, there's probably a lot of stuff that gets released under an open-source license (or straight into the public domain) because the author is essentially "done" with it and throwing it out to the community to do with what they will, but certainly open-source players like Apache, Mozilla, etc. have a vision for their main projects, and members of the community are attracted to and contribute to projects, no doubt, largely because of how they see the project's vision as compatible with their own. The "solution" McFarland offers is what it seems to me almost every major open-source project is already openly trying to do: allow the community to contribute, but institute a degree of top-down control in terms of timelines, roadmap, and assignments to make sure that the grunt-work necessary to have a polished project gets done.

I probably wouldn't call it "acting like the Cathedral", the openness of many successful projects to community process and innovation, while retaining a kind of top-down vision, is something of a synthesis: the Cathedral harnessing the energy of the Bazaar, the Bazaar borrowing the focus of the Cathedral. And you see something like it in the embrace by some commercial, formerly closed-source vendors of both open-source software and increasing community involvement. If I had to name the model, I'd call it the "Congregation" or "Assembly", a less-propietary Cathedral, a small portion of the Bazaar united by a common purpose and direction to accept, in the context of a project, some degree of authority and leadership (but not the exclusive ownership and control of the Cathedral.)

I think I know what's wrong... (2, Insightful)

Negativeions101 (706722) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959218)

I think many F/OSS developers tend to have this attitude that they're developing software for themselves or for the F/OSS community... as opposed to developing software that is intuitive for anyone and everyone to use. And I think that's the KEY to making OSS software mainstream. Design it with OTHERS in mind. Design it to be intuitive to use right from the begining otherwise I don't see F/OSS software becoming mainstream. And I'm in no way suggesting replacing power with easy of use. The two can go hand in hand but it's not that easy.... but it's easier if you have the right frame of mind.

The article is all wrong. (3, Insightful)

Qbertino (265505) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959232)

OSS doesn't suffer from the lack of leadership or other, supposed 'Cathedral' qualities. In fact, it's the superior leadership, based on merrit and ideals, that turns OSS into the nightmare of anything cathedral - such as MS.
In OSS much more than anywhere else, the best floats on top. That's why Outlook mail sucks and KMail sucks considerably less. Linux works because NOBODY doubts that Linus is the chief, Blender works because NOBODY doubts that Ton is the chief, because they both do an excellent job at what they do: leading large OSS projects.
Of course there's weedy stuff in OSS that's buggier and more twisted than Autodesk Converter and Macromedia Director together, but that sinks to the lowest bottom, and does not get pushed onto the market by monopolies and marketing budgets of galactic proportions (Windows XP anyone?).

The article is bogus and has it all backwards. I want my 5 minutes back.

i need both in a good city (1)

Optikschmoptik (971793) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959304)

whoa! I go to RTFA and come back to an avalanche of fanboy one-liners, flamebaits and accusations, all perfectly illustrating the author's point.

The Bazaar is fun, but it can be exhausting after a little while. If you want to come away from it with anything worthwhile, you need to be pretty clever, or have some insider information. Otherwise, it's a lot of noise and junk and hobbyists selling kitsch. There are some great deals, but you have to know how to operate and where to look. Everyone is working for themselves; some things make sense, and some are just crazy. See the above replies to this article to see what I mean (check for lower scores).

I think when the author refers to cathedrals, it also has to do with the end result. There's management, and it's mostly separate from the chaos of a bazaar or the all-directions-at-once FOSS universe. Good management gets you a cathedral as a result. Bad management gets you a Spanish Inquisition. FOSS has accomplished a lot, but there are some real masterpieces of software in the closed-source world, the 'cathedral' world, that I haven't seen FOSS get anywhere near.

For the sake of discussion, here are the two titles that keep Windows on my HD: Native Instruments Traktor and Ableton Live--they're pro DJ programs for music production and live performance. If anyone can show me a FOSS project that really competes, please tell me about it. I've looked, but most of what I can find is more of a proof-of-concept than anything I would trust performing at a club. The projects are so specific that someone apparently needs to round people up, interview them, and pay a select few of them to write and maintain the software. The hobbyist/genius inventor thing is interesting, and I don't mean to say that I'm not really impressed with what people have managed to create on their own, but the resulting software just isn't going to work for me when I actually have to cue up a timecode record and match beats.

But then, for everyday stuff, FOSS is totally the way to go. When I do general computing--web surfing, programming, chatting, frozen bubble--open-source programmers have run circles around the 'cathedral' folks. So maybe they just need to get around to my niche market someday (I'll admit it first: I'm not smart enough to do it myself). Only problem is I can't wait that long. For now, and I'm glad there was some management good enough to make it, FOSS or not.

McFarland says FOSS and management/leadership aren't mutually exclusive. He says 'hybrids of both styles will provide better frameworks to deal with large projects'. There, that doesn't cramp your style too much, does it?

Just a description (1, Insightful)

kaffiene (38781) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959414)

This article is just a description of the F/OSS world - it *is* a Bazaar, so it *is* anarchistic and that's *why* people stay interested and contribute - if they can and they want to, they do.

It's true that better leaders help projects produce things faster, but F/OSS has never been strong because of DEVELOPMENT SPEED, F/OSS has been strong because of diversity and the LACK of an authoritarian view. The community (warts and all) is precisely WHY F/OSS has succeeded.

The article author assumes that there is one direction we all want to go in and we should just get there as quick as possible. This is not how we got to where we are now, and it's not required for the future. Certain projects are chugging along with speed with a vision, others are meandering along to the sound of their own drums. These are all good. No need to panic, certainly no need to criticise the VERY WELLSPRING from which this world arose.

Article Summary (1)

waveclaw (43274) | more than 7 years ago | (#16959484)

"I find your lack of vision disturbing."

FTA:
Incidentally, few Cathedral-style projects suffer from lack of vision: those that do simply die off and are never heard from again. Bazaar-style development allows projects to be in a zombie state for long periods of time, where it is vastly expensive for a Cathedral-style project to do the same.

Reminds me of the Gegls project to re-invent the internals of the Gimp. Lots of hot air^H^H^H^H design initially, goes dead for X years, then just recently Kolas starts hacking on it [gimp.org] .

So much overreaction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16959526)

All the author is saying is that in some cases (particularly cases where there's not strong leadership) Bazaar style development can be more of a hindrance than a boon. It's nothing personal. Matter of fact, it's true.

However, I think the author fails to note (but may have assumed we knew it) that while there are a lot of cherry-picked projects out there, we're not left with a bunch of cherries sitting around rotting uselessly - I've got a whole operating system and every kind of service I'd want to have, and it all works together.
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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...