| Notices |
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Are you new to LinuxQuestions.org? Visit the following links:
Site Howto |
Site FAQ |
Sitemap |
Register Now
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
 |
GNU/Linux Basic Guide
This 255-page guide will provide you with the keys to understand the philosophy of free software, teach you how to use and handle it, and give you the tools required to move easily in the world of GNU/Linux. Many users and administrators will be taking their first steps with this GNU/Linux Basic guide and it will show you how to approach and solve the problems you encounter.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free. |
|
|
By Anonymous at 2006-09-23 09:04
|
|
I've often wondered amidst all this angst and heartburning debates over FOSS, licensing, software patents, political and technological debates which tend to split development projects and create negativity whether the issue is really about Freedom. Because the concept of Freedom can be a little confusing as different people tend to evaluate it on different planes.
In a majority of cases, I believe that the last thing a developer who's newly venturing into FOSS thinks about is the implications of releasing software as FOSS. This may sound strange to many of us and indeed counter-intuitive. But I certainly think that peer approval and recognition plays a huge role when people initially release software as FOSS. It's a heady mix - people see your app, download it, use it and you get a high out of the praise and recognition in the community. Everything goes smoothly until one day the developer finds that somebody else has released a fork out of a disagreement arising either out of technical or non-technical grounds. Suddenly the world's not perfect any more.
Then the developer suddenly wakes up to reality and finds out that he can no longer reclaim his work as his own. Suddenly the developer realizes that somebody else has snatched away all those long hours of work put into developing that application. He is no longer in control of who uses, modifies and releases the code and leads to huge splits and debates within the development community.
Why am I saying all this? Because ultimately all this affects us as end users.
For believe it or not, I am certainly one guy who doesn't think software comes easy. There's no magic factory anywhere which churns out code to produce those wonderful applications we use every day. Developing even a trivial desktop calculator is an involved process. Many end users fail to appreciate this fact. Ultimately nothing is free in life and we all pay the price of it in one form or the other. For developers I think the lesson is to carefully consider the implications of licensing, particularly in huge projects. It's also most important that people respect territories and boundaries which arise more out of the human element rather than a purely technological one. After all, we're all human beings and we all think and act like human beings.
A developer is no different and he's the one who's put in all the hard work into making life comfortable for the users. And it's a fact that not all developers are made the same. Some developers possess skills which are quite rare and irreplaceable, particularly when it comes to systems and OS development. They can command top salaries in major corporations and yet there are a good bunch of guys who release their entire life work for the benefit of humanity.
One way or the other, we are all indebted to these people and there's always a price to pay - physical, mental, emotional or moral. That is the karma of FOSS and of life.
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:11 PM.
|
|
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
|
Latest Threads
LQ News
|
|
As far as I'm aware, the GPL does have protections for the original author.
Anyhow, there are many examples where the very "failures" you've attempted to explore have resulted in better quality software. For example: XFree86 vs. Xorg. We now have a "modular" X, thanks to the Xorg project. If they hadn't forked from XFree86, we'd still be stuck using a monolithic behemoth.
Another fine example is the whole cdrecord debacle. The original developer of cdrecord has become obstinate and seemingly refuses to accept the fact that the Linux kernel can allow CD burning without the need for a SCSI emulation layer. Personally speaking, CD recording seems to work much better for me without a SCSI emulation layer, but I still have to put up with nasty messages from a recalcitrant software developer every time I wish to burn a CD from the command line. Don't get me wrong, I am very grateful for the utility that Mr. Schilling's software has provided me over the years, but we can't stand still. If he isn't willing to move with the times, someone needs to take over. Once the dust settles, we will have a better quality CD writing package for Linux.
As someone who has been using Linux since 1999, I can honestly say that I have seen this sort of thing over and over again. It has resulted in better quality software every single time.
And also, there is always a "cost" of using FOSS to the users, whether we recognize it or not. That was another point I made.
And as to misunderstanding the motivation of FOSS, I beg to disagree. Love of coding surely cannot be the single reason why those coders give away so much of a lifetime's work for free.
If you've ever coded any non-trivial application, you will know how much feeling of ownership you have over the code. This is a natural human reaction to anything we create. The reasons for sharing for free are varied and rather complex.
The FOSS community should be working as a team toward a common goal. If we have to substitute certain players along the way, so be it. Nobody is irreplaceable. Linux can continue without Linus. Slackware can continue without Patrick V. And for a case in point: Debian has been running for almost 10 years without Ian Murdock at the helm.
These people and everyone else in FOSS are merely "spokes in the wheel." The software has taken on a life of it's own.
This is a major advantage of FOSS. If a developer dies, their code can live on. There are no secrets which die with their creators.
Lots of things to write about