Yet another thing you will never hear...
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| land0 Jan 16, 2008 9:20 AM EDT |
...from a proprietary operating system developer. "I do hate doing -rc's for so long, but I hate releasing when not feeling it's simmered enough even more." I know there is a debate that comes up from time to time whether it is a safe to tout the quality of GNU/Linux. It is public statements like this that communicate a sense of ownership, responsibility and thoughtfulness that largely seem to exist only in FOSS software. This accounts for a lot of the reason why people feel confident about proclaiming the quality. It is more than the words though it is the actions behind them and the product that is produced as a result. Now if everybody was this conscientious about the naming of their releases maybe, just maybe the side of the debate that cautions about the use of quality in reference to GNU/Linux would be satiated. Just a thought |
| NoDough Jan 16, 2008 11:21 AM EDT |
Quoting:I know there is a debate that comes up from time to time whether it is a safe to tout the quality of GNU/Linux. It is public statements like this that communicate a sense of ownership, responsibility and thoughtfulness that largely seem to exist only in FOSS software.This ownership, responsibility and thoughtfulness exist in proprietary software houses as well. However, the developer's are often overruled by management. "SHIP IT!" It would be naive to presume that the same cannot occur in a FOSS shop. |
| tuxchick Jan 16, 2008 11:50 AM EDT |
Not to mention marketing and legal departments sticking their oars in and gumming up the works. I have no reservations touting the quality of FOSS, or at least the projects that I know that are well-run. |
| rijelkentaurus Jan 16, 2008 12:26 PM EDT |
Quoting: or at least the projects that I know that are well-run. The ones that aren't well run tend to die off, FOSS is very survival-of-the-fittest. MS, however, is proof that money can buy longevity with a product that would not survive a year in the "wild". |
| land0 Jan 17, 2008 1:33 AM EDT |
@NoDough
This may be true but unfortunately as you point out it results in the same end result. Poor and even shoddy software being proclaimed as ready for consumption when in fact it is not. I am sure there is more to it like you and @tuxchick indicate. Maybe that is the underlying reason behind us reading such public statement primarily from mostly FOSS developers.
But in the end no matter what the reason behind it there is an undeniable lack of public statements like this from proprietary application developers. Probably because they would be fired three different ways and then skinned alive! ;) Of course then they would just eventually become FOSS developers and be able to make such announcements publicly. Such is the circle of coders. :D @rijelkentaurus Amen to that! M$ software is the perfect example of marketing over quality. |
| land0 Jan 17, 2008 1:43 AM EDT |
@NoDough In the context of FOSS "shops" I assume you mean projects. If that is a correct assumption on my part then I thought I touched on that in the last sentence of the second paragraph of my comment. .."Now if everybody was this conscientious about the naming of their releases maybe, just maybe the side of the debate that cautions about the use of quality in reference to GNU/Linux would be satiated." |
| NoDough Jan 17, 2008 1:21 PM EDT |
Quoting:In the context of FOSS "shops" I assume you mean projects.I hadn't given it much thought, but the image in my mind was that of a development house that releases their software FOSS. (i.e. RedHat, Zimbra, etc.) I really didn't picture a project with no HQ and hordes of volunteers around the globe. |
| land0 Jan 17, 2008 3:04 PM EDT |
@NoDough Ah, I see much clearer where you are coming from. In that context I whole heartedly agree with you. It is interesting but I as I ponder your point I find it hard to distinguish between the projects and "shops". Many of the lines have been so completely blurred due to the duality of the development process in this context. e.g. On one side the project leads are responsible for the "project" for the companies sake. On the other side to the community for the influx of improvements and quality. I see now why I missed your point the first time around. As you were pointing at that line that for me is is kinda fuzzy and gray/grey. Thanks for taking the time to hand me the new glasses. ;) |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!