Vote:Most Deserving Open Source Charity

Open Source can be a charity just as much as it can be a business model. And several charities have sprung up to help fund the effort. The nominees you selected for this category are the Free Software Foundation, Software in the Public Interest, The Apache Software Foundation and the XFree86 Project. Vote for the one that you think deserves it most.

Comments

Where's Gutenberg?

[Frater 219]

Considering the number of people who mentioned Project Gutenberg in the original discussion of this category, I am moderately disappointed it isn't an option.

Re:Where's Gutenberg?

[algae]

I agree; I was hoping to be able to vote for them. Furthermore, I don't really think that Apache or XFree86 are charities, so much as software development organizations. Not to say I don't appreciate them or their work; I do!

Re:Where's Gutenberg?

[Anonymous Coward]

Project Gutenberg is about books, lots of text. Most Slashdot readers can't read more than a screenful before their brains start hurting.

XFree86

[mozUser123]

I'm voting for XFree86 because I believe this project to be vital to the mainstream acceptance of Linux and other intel based UNIXes in general. Most applications run in a GUI, whatever desktop environments/window managers are used have to run on top of X and then the applications run on top of the window managers. Therefore we need a firm foundation and XFree86 4.0 looks like it will offer that. If this money can assist the development of 4.0 can be enhanced by a financial contribution then that's great.
--

Re:XFree86

[Fjord]

Definiately. XFree86 still has plenty of work in front of it to get linux on the desktop, although companies like Corel will help them along, I'm sure.

FSF

[Anonymous Coward]

The free software foundation is the most deserving charity because the free software foundation is actively heading the development of many free software projects that are promoting the use of free software more than any other group. All Xfree86 makes is an X server. X servers are needed to promote the use of free software. However, much more is needed than just an X server.

Re:FSF

[root:DavidOgg]

I agree, The Free Software Foundation also has had influence on other projects, including Xfree86. The FSF is largely responsible for the state of Free Software(tm) today.

Slash 0.4

[metawronka]

Slash 0.4
by kuro5hin

For a long time now, those who want to use and improve the slashdot code have been wondering, and waiting, and hoping for the much promised 0.4 tarball. Many of them have in fact become quite irate about the lag between code releases, the lack of a CVS server, and the overall appearance that the slashdot gang doesn't practice what it preaches ("release early, release often"). How would you respond to these criticisms, and do you intend to change the development practices in any way in the future?

CmdrTaco:

I get a nice flamey email about once a week from some ass who calls me a hypocrite and slams me for not getting out a new release. My usual response is to tell them that I delay the release by 24 hours each time someone asks me when a new Slash tarball will be out.

Seriously, there are only 3 people who really know how much work a source release for this is: CowboyNeal, Patrick and Me. And the three of us have been working on a lot of stuff. As I write this, we are bugfixing and documenting and preparing for a source release. There is a private CVS server that one day soon will be publicly read only.

This isn't like other projects: it has been custom fit to our hardware and to our needs. It doesn't have install scripts or help or even comments in the code. We're just too busy to play tech support helping dozens of people compile mod_perl and tune Apache. We've decided to squash the bugs and make a clean release rather than rush it.

It's really easy for someone to complain that I didn't release a new version of the source code every week. Its also easy to forget that in the last 6 months we've doubled in traffic and we've had to optimize our code and hardware to handle that. A new source release is secondary: Our job is running Slashdot. We want to release new versions of Slash, but it is a definite second priority to keeping Slashdot moving.

Finally, it's coming soon. It'll be out when its finished. And if you ask me again I'll postpone it again.

_
/\
|\_/|
|---|
| |
| |
_|=-=|_
_ /\| |/\
/\| | | ||\
| | | | |\>
| | | | | \
|- - - -|) )
| /
\ /
\ /
\ /

Re: Slash 0.4

[driehuis]

Ooh, such harsh words!

Let me make a confession here. The reason that I contribute small, rounded off patches to Open Source projects (either a bug fix or one (1) feature), is that I know how much work goes into packaging something big, or just into merging patches like the ones I write (irrespective of how well these patches are done). There are too many projects I care about and work on, and too little time, and this must certainly be even more true for the slashdot crew.

I think Sun could put more effort into merging work on the JDK done by the community, but I wouldn't like to be in the shoes of the Sun manager who has got to get funding to hire folks to actually do it. And I have great respect for the folks at Netscape/Mozilla, who go through the daunting task of integrating patches in the face of criticism for not putting everything they get in on the same day.

So, to counter Eric Raymonds assertion that releasing early & often is the ticket to success, I'd like to quote Wietze Venema (I hope; apologies if I goof up the quote): "It is ready when it's ready".

On a few occasions, I've been referred to slashdot by people I was surprised to find had Linux on their radar. That in itself is a major achievement, and if the only price I pay for that service is to put some brainpower in myself when I need to build a user community site in Internet time (which could also be phrased as "ripping off slashdot in a hurry"), so be it.

It's ready when it's ready. That's my motto.