On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 05:09:29 -0500 C Anthony Risinger <anthony@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:39 AM, Tom Gundersen <teg@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Felipe Contreras > > <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> Well, I see absolutely no evidence of such an analysis, so > >>>> consider me a skeptic. > >>> > >>> That's ok. We are not in the PR business, we are not selling > >>> anything. > >> > >> You are selling a distribution. > > > > We are? Damn. Where is my cut. Allan!? > > :-) > > it's interesting to me how so many can believe that > OSS/distros/etc/etc are really driven and decided by the whimsical > desires of the complete, mob-like user base. > > open, collaborative development has only 5% to do with feel good > all-for-one-and-one-for-all type shitz, and 95% to do with the needs > of the investing/funding/contracting user-base, and/or the > itches/scratches/interests of developers capable of architecting > useful tools from mere ideas and/or hot air. > > example: in the last ~2 months i've contributed code to ~4 different > projects: 3 were fulfilling a *business* need for the company that > employs me, relating to AMQP and [gag] SOAP, which frankly i could > care less about and would actually prefer if they faded away forever > ... but no, i FURTHERED them, because that's what the requirements > called for; another project is a popular Python application server, > and was furthered for both business and personal/pleasure reasons > (interesting); only 1 was purely for fun, relating to Python -> JS > translation ... a real challenge ... > > alas, even the one for fun i did for *me* -- not to sound like an ass, > but i don't much give two shitzs about everyone else's needs less they > contribute competent code, or at the very least, competent thought and > constructive ideas. a little respect goes a long way ... > > ... and on that same vein, i have next-to-nil patience for whining. > the point of this ramble-esque message is to highlight the fact that > 90% of what i output is business related, 30-40% of that is shit i > wish would evaporate, and 10-20% is my personal > interests/free-time-development (which i abandon and find other > projects once it becomes boring and/or "un-fun") > > SO! truth is the commercial fedoras/redhats and ubuntus out there are > all a vibrant part of this process, and they WILL supply/shoulder the > bulk of development. buck up folks! just get used to it! Arch plays > a part too (yay python2 symlink! ;-) in various capacities, but > software research/development and long-term maintenance of decadent > tools is NOT that part. why? because Arch is part of the 10-20% > section of most developer's time -- ehm, you know, the part where they > do what they !@#$%^& want -- so suck it up and make clear/concise > contributions of code/thought/reason as best you can ... because this > endless droning on RE:piddly-little-wah-wah-problems makes for really > fscking boring reads. > Relevant link: http://www.h-online.com/open/features/Can-open-source-be-democratic-1663702.html
