Re: [NTLK] Shout out to developers

On 9/3/06, Martin Joseph <NT@stillnewt.org> wrote:
> On Sep 3, 2006, at 6:06 AM, Jon Glass wrote:
>
> > I don't mean just "not crashing" but not in a constant state of
> > flux, never finishing.
> >
> > I guess I say all that to say that even if this is Open Source, it
> > needs to be viewed as product not project.
>
> Actually these are very good points, but they also seem to indicate
> that given some more time these projects might eclipse some of the
> products that currently exist.

but that implies no progress in the "products" that currently exist. :-)

> Since OSS developers do continue to work on and refine a project,
> this is seemingly a good thing in the end. Firefox seems the best
> example of this type of issue. It takes quite a while longer then it
> might with commercial software, as there is no one to foot the bill
> for people to sit and code full time.

Actually, Firefox is one of those exceptions that is run more as a
product than a "project". They push for certain points, including
feature lockdown, etc. There is Firefox 1.0, 1.5 and now 2.0. Yes,
there are nightly builds, etc. but the "public" release is treated as
a product. This is OSS done "right," IMO. However, like you said,
there are benefits to the 'project' method, and for some software,
this is great. I use some software that follows this model, but it's
not "mission-critical" software either. For our Newtons, I think this
is "mission-critical" and ought not be treated as some ephemeral
project with no time frame, no feature goals, etc. It needs to be as
definite as we can make it. In other words, is there some way we can
force this issue beyond mere discussion? Maybe someone who will say,
Here is what is going to happen. If you agree, put your money where
your mouth is. ;-) I like the comments made by the NetBSD fellow about
the failings of NetBSD, and what he thinks the solution should
be--solid leadership.

> Still I think this isn't a finished argument, and we may still see
> the OSS projects come out looking more polished and complete then we
> currently imagine.

Not so long as there is no real vision--polish is not exactly a byword
for OSS. ;-) As long as "polish" is not qualified and quantified, it
will never happen. Somebody has to step up to the plate and just do
it. What's funny is that this has sort of happened with Open Office,
in that somebody decided to give some polish to it, and released
NeoOffice. From what I can read between the lines, the OOo people
aren't happy with it, nor are the GIMP people happy with GIMPShop,
which is another attempt at adding polish to rather rough projects.
But you can't have polish without some form of control.

-- 
 -Jon Glass
Krakow, Poland
<jonglass@usa.net>
There is no such thing as public opinion. There is only published
opinion.   --Winston Churchill
-- 
This is the NewtonTalk list - http://www.newtontalk.net/ for all inquiries
Official Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/
WikiWikiNewt for all kinds of articles: http://tools.unna.org/wikiwikinewt/