Wrote Sean O'Dell <sean@celsoft.com>, on Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 11:36:18AM
+0900:
> I also see loads of new projects coming out that aren't funded at all
> that beat out older *nix projects. Take Sendmail for example. Sendmail
> *is* commercial and funded. Exim is not. Exim is a terrific replacement
> for Sendmail; has most if not all (now) of Sendmail's functionality, and
> is so much easier to learn and master, it's hardly comparable.
Exim was developed by the University of Cambridge, it may not be
commercial, but it wasn't some guy working in his basement, either.
Philip Hazel developed Exim AT the University of Cambridge, and the copyright
belongs to the FSF. As far as I know, he developed it pretty much alone.
ISPs using exim are contributing paid company hours into maintaining and
adding enhancements to it. There are thousands (10s of thousands?) more
ISPs today than there were 10 years ago.
Matz is payed to work on ruby full-time.
O'Reilly pours money into OS development.
> It's better developers. Linux is growing in popularity, and programmers
> usually making big bucks in large commercial sectors are devoting more of
> their free time to open source projects.
Those developers are using Linux in large commercial sectors, and many
of those developers are contributing paid company hours to working on
it.
This is sort of my overall point, that commercial talent is making its way
into open source projects.
Sean O'Dell
···
On Tuesday 15 June 2004 07:22, Sam Roberts wrote:
"Bah! Ctrl-H for replace?! That's unintuitive and user-unfriendly.
Therefore, broken, behind the times, and personally infuriating."
<sorry, was just trying to get into the spirit of this thread.>
···
On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 00:38:15 +0900, James Britt <jamesunderbarb@neurogami.com> wrote:
David Garamond wrote:
...
> Please, Unix editors like vi/vim and emacs _do_ evolve improve over time
> (although I personally don't use vi & emacs). Tell that to Windows,
> whose Notepad, last time I checked, hasn't even got a Replace
> functionality.
Ctrl-H
James, happy gvim user on Windows and 'nix.
"Sean O'Dell" <sean@celsoft.com> writes:
Philip Hazel developed Exim AT the University of Cambridge, and
the copyright belongs to the FSF. As far as I know, he
developed it pretty much alone.
Well, he may have developed it alone, but it seems as though he
did it on "company" time:
Copyright (c) 1995 - 2003 University of Cambridge.
It doesn't appear as if the copyright has been assigned to the
FSF, where did you get that idea?
···
--
Josh Huber
Wrote Sean O'Dell <sean@celsoft.com>, on Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 03:19:21AM +0900:
> Wrote Sean O'Dell <sean@celsoft.com>, on Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 11:36:18AM
+0900:
>
> > I also see loads of new projects coming out that aren't funded at all
> > that beat out older *nix projects. Take Sendmail for example. Sendmail
> > *is* commercial and funded. Exim is not. Exim is a terrific replacement
> > for Sendmail; has most if not all (now) of Sendmail's functionality, and
> > is so much easier to learn and master, it's hardly comparable.
>
> Exim was developed by the University of Cambridge, it may not be
> commercial, but it wasn't some guy working in his basement, either.
Philip Hazel developed Exim AT the University of Cambridge, and the copyright
belongs to the FSF. As far as I know, he developed it pretty much alone.
Exactly, he did in on University time, getting paid to do it, not on
"evenings and weekends".
> > It's better developers. Linux is growing in popularity, and programmers
> > usually making big bucks in large commercial sectors are devoting more of
> > their free time to open source projects.
>
> Those developers are using Linux in large commercial sectors, and many
> of those developers are contributing paid company hours to working on
> it.
This is sort of my overall point, that commercial talent is making its way
into open source projects.
It appears to me to be the opposite, companies are hiring and giving
resources to OS talent (Linus, for example).
Philip Hazel isn't "commercial talent". Most OS developers have either
worked, like him, for universities or companies. Did you think that the
"low-talent" coders of yester-year were making ends meet by working at
Starbucks?
Sam
···
On Tuesday 15 June 2004 07:22, Sam Roberts wrote:
--
Sam Roberts <sroberts@certicom.com>
You're right, I just double-checked. I read that yesterday in an article
about Exim, but I either mis-read it or they were wrong.
Sean O'Dell
···
On Tuesday 15 June 2004 11:48, Josh Huber wrote:
"Sean O'Dell" <sean@celsoft.com> writes:
> Philip Hazel developed Exim AT the University of Cambridge, and
> the copyright belongs to the FSF. As far as I know, he
> developed it pretty much alone.
Well, he may have developed it alone, but it seems as though he
did it on "company" time:
Copyright (c) 1995 - 2003 University of Cambridge.
It doesn't appear as if the copyright has been assigned to the
FSF, where did you get that idea?
As much as "getting the last word in" has been such fun sport lately,
I might suggest this has strayed way, way, way off the original topic,
and any topics that might be considered valid for this list.
···
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 04:14:16 +0900, Sean O'Dell <sean@celsoft.com> wrote:
I don't see how any of this counters my point that Linux software is getting
better because better programmers are contributing more often to open source
projects.
I don't see how any of this counters my point that Linux software is
getting
better because better programmers are contributing more often to open
source
projects.
No one is trying to counter your point that better programmers are
contributing. We are trying to get the point across that, that isn' the sole
reason OSS is getting better. And a huge factor in this is because
programmers are able to spend *commercial* time on OSS, which you seem to
either disagree with or won't (or haven't) said that you agree with it.
Zach
···
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.705 / Virus Database: 461 - Release Date: 6/12/2004
This is what bothers you? That I didn't come out and agree with you? Do you
know how juvenile that is? You feel it's okay to take the position that
someone disagrees with you because they nod and pat you on the head for
something you said? Even though my original point isn't something you
contend, you treat me as though I was wrong and am arguing, UNTIL I come out
and agree with something you've said?
That's pretty juvenile, and something I expect in #l33t on IRC, or perhaps
Slashdot. Grown-ups don't argue with people just because they don't wiggle
along side them and rub their tummies with validating agreements. I think
you have a group of people here who all nod at the same time, and who argue
against anyone who doesn't drop in line with exactly what you say or think,
and you're among those people.
My statement stands. If you want me to agree with some other point you want
to clear up, go hire someone to nod at you.
Sean O'Dell
···
On Tuesday 15 June 2004 12:26, Zach Dennis wrote:
>I don't see how any of this counters my point that Linux software is
getting
>better because better programmers are contributing more often to open
source
>projects.
No one is trying to counter your point that better programmers are
contributing. We are trying to get the point across that, that isn' the
sole reason OSS is getting better. And a huge factor in this is because
programmers are able to spend *commercial* time on OSS, which you seem to
either disagree with or won't (or haven't) said that you agree with it.
Sean,
You missed the jist of my point. I dont' want you to agree with me, I wanted
you to take a stand on whether or not you believed better programmers were
the only reason, or if you agreed/disagreed with the notion that it was also
because programmers could spend commercial time on OSS.
And you took that stand in your last post, i'm just sorry you had to type
roughly 500 characters getting it across and then calling me juvenile... I
don't see anyone making personal attacks on you.
Zach
···
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.705 / Virus Database: 461 - Release Date: 6/12/2004
I believe Linux software is getting better because better programmers are able
to contribute more to open source software. I've said that several times
now.
Sean O'Dell
···
On Tuesday 15 June 2004 12:41, Zach Dennis wrote:
Sean,
You missed the jist of my point. I dont' want you to agree with me, I
wanted you to take a stand on whether or not you believed better
programmers were the only reason, or if you agreed/disagreed with the
notion that it was also because programmers could spend commercial time on
OSS.
And you took that stand in your last post, i'm just sorry you had to type
roughly 500 characters getting it across and then calling me juvenile... I
don't see anyone making personal attacks on you.
A good understanding of why OSS is getting better is important, since it will have a significant impact on careers and societies at large. An important debate worth deeper clarification and framing.
Personally, I think the ability to profit from OSS has lured more programmers. And, the greater recognition/impact the larger market offers. Eric Raymond mades an interesting point about respect and recognition being a fairly significant driving force of OSS development. I think there is something to that, and the fact that the recognition has moved mainstream has driven interest. Also, realization that the software may be used by the mainstream market is motivating for many commerical developers- even if the product isn't commercial, this is the market they are used to envisioning and creating for.
The OSS technology stack is now more mainstream- many commercial developers are now using cvs/ant/junit/java and this helps a lot. The convergence of Windows and Unix development models also helps a lot. My initial career was Windows-oriented and this left me pretty clue-less regarding Unix development.
Also, I thing there is a demograpic influence- there is a generation of programmers 30 to 40 who are a bit burnt out by the commercial rat race, and just want to code interesting stuff.
I read an interesting article recently (don't remember where) about the difficulties of OSS project manager, as told by KDE and Gnome people. One of the significant factors is that contributers on average are only available for 3 to 9 months. Commercial money definitely helps there.
And the general zeitgeist now says if you haven't done something opensource, or patched an operating system kernel, you just aren't a real man/woman :). It's like hippies going to Woodstock.
Nick
Sean O'Dell wrote:
···
On Tuesday 15 June 2004 12:41, Zach Dennis wrote:
Sean,
You missed the jist of my point. I dont' want you to agree with me, I
wanted you to take a stand on whether or not you believed better
programmers were the only reason, or if you agreed/disagreed with the
notion that it was also because programmers could spend commercial time on
OSS.
And you took that stand in your last post, i'm just sorry you had to type
roughly 500 characters getting it across and then calling me juvenile... I
don't see anyone making personal attacks on you.
I believe Linux software is getting better because better programmers are able to contribute more to open source software. I've said that several times now.
Sean O'Dell