Slashdot Mirror
Linux 'Awfully Cathedral-Like' - Java's a Bazaar
jg21 writes "LinuxWorld draws attention to a curious use of ESR's The Cathedral and the Bazaar by the Sun Microsystems exec who currently talks about Linux more than he does even about Java. Apparently Sun's President and COO Jonathan Schwartz said at a press briefing last week that Java with its JCP is more like ESR's Bazaar than Linux, which he dismissed as being "awfully cathedral-like" since Linus is the final arbiter (or Great Dictator), and not a committee." But be sure you don't mis-use the word Java in this Bazaar or the Mall Police will totally get you.
Linux is holy and Java is bizarre.
Sun is completely lacking in clue here, as always.
Sun, of course, feels heavily threatened by Linux and is merely spreading FUD in order to cement Sun's (TINY) market share and bolster Sun's (TINY) share price.
I have been an active member of the Linux community since its inception and we have been exorbitantly friendly to new users and developers. Sun, by contrast, makes you sign restrictive participatory agreements and agree to non-Free licences for community-owned code.
Sun is dead. Long live Linux.
I'm not Seth Finkelstein. I still speak the truth.
A slashdot about my 2 most favorite topics, can it get any better? Thats what I thought!
Windows is awfully cathedral like, because what Bill or Balmer says goes, and that's the only version of windows I'm ever likely to see.
Linux on the other hand, I can muck around in the code myself however I like. I can include other people's patches that Linus *does not* approve, or I can even change it myself (though between you and me, don't expect it to do a damn thing other than crash).
How is that cathedral like?
And how is java superior in any significant way?
a short summary of The Cathedral and the Bazaar for us few ignorant folk?
Presumably this refers to the kernel itself and not the horde (hoard?) of packages and applications that sit around it.
"Linux" as most people understand the term is the 2-5 CDs full of software that makes a PC do interesting things.
And it's about as bazaar as it can be.
Sig for sale or rent. One previous user. Inquire within.
I guess if ESR were to contribute something to the development of software, I might consider his model worth considering. One thing he's done is write self-aggrandizing screeds that are easy to attack, and wouldn't ya know, Sun does so.
What part of "A well regulated militia" do you not understand?
It seems to me that using generalisations on what development leadership strategy is best is wrong. I mean, look at the totally different method Linux has compared to Apache compared to any other successfull project. The deciding factor for success for each of these very different strategies is in how well it fits the people involved and how well it gets the best results through. One size does definitely not fit all.
Two java flame wars in as many hours. Is shashdot turning into theserverside.com?
Can't we all just get along and play together?
Ballmer and Schwartz could reproduce with each other.
What kind of sick freak would come of that? A linux and java hating/loving/hating/lov... Gollum-esque creature?
Cmdr Taco's homepage was just Slashdotted! There is justice in the world!
... and I can definitely affirm that Java is bizarre. B-dum-chee! Thank you! Tip your waiters!
Seriously, Schwartz's bias is clear. The Java Community Process which involves committees of experts and interested parties does indeed yield enhancements to the Java API that are nicely featured and well thought out. But getting on those committees in the first place requires surmounting quite a hurdle. And in the end, Sun itself remains every bit as much a "final arbiter" to the core in which any enhancement runs, the virtual machine.
... please explain.
Maybe this is too idiomatic so my language skills leave me alone ???
CC.
P.S.:Editorial comment, offtopic by rule.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
Anybody can fork the kernel. Most distributions do. Multiple threads of development happening independently versus everything having to go through a single party is what characterises the bazaar as separate from the cathedral, and this means that Linux is the epitome of the bazaar development process.
the info you seek. it was required reading for us computer engineering students in software design 1.
when you manage to delegate more important stuff, contribution comes from greater people. status has weight.
Pretty soon, Jonathan Schwartz is going to be taking over the "Plays the Rabid Linux Media Like a Violin" title from Darl McBride.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
I don't think that the original idea of the "bazaar" development model was "everyone does whatever the hell they want". You need someone at the top of the tree to decide what stays and what goes. The fact that this is a person and not a number of people is just a coincidence of the way that Linux has emerged, and doesn't represent a large divergence from the bazaar model.
In short: Shut up Schwarz.
apterous.org
The guys at SUN must have a case of Bazaar envy.
He is looking for Windows Mighty Destroyer.
Jeoin
R3
Stuff that matters: circuitbreakers, vacuum-cleaners coffee makers, calculators generators, matching salt+pepper shakers
Maybe John Hinckley.
Someone saying something "bad" about their competition!
In other news, MS claims use of Linux violates 1m of their patents and has been known in the state of california to cause cancer.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
haha, taco got ./ed
The cathedral means developing inside a small circle and releasing only in great intervals. The bazaar means releasing all the time and letting lots of people submit patches. By that definition, the JCP is certainly more cathedral-like than Linux.
(Note that the cathedral/bazaar difference doesn't refer to free vs. non-free; the FSF's early free software was developed in a more of a cathedral model.)
I find when corporate CEOs openly attack the opposition it's from a position of fear and weakness more than anything. When you're attacked by your competitor, you're doing something right. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't hear Jobs attacking Linux and it's in direct competition with OSX in the server market. What did he do instead? He embraces it. I'd love for Sun to enter the desktop market more like I think they want to, but they have to give up on the "let's replace MS" dream.
Luck favors the prepared, darling.
Reason? If Linux users don't like the direction Linus decides to take, the code is there, and may be freely forked to provide a starting point for a new, different direction.
If Java(tm) users don't like the direction Java(tm) is taking... Tough. They're stuck with it.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
Hasn't it mostly been agreed that the successful OS projects are those where there is a lead developer who steers the project?
In my opinion... both - Linux model and JCP model - are good and bad bazaars in their own strength (and weaknesses)
Linux model - with Linus as a benevolent dictator - is really about dynamic - where decision making cannot lies with Linus alone. The decisions have to be supported. In simple sense - Linus can be overruled - he is there only because he is wanted by the community to be there.
JCP, on the other hand, is more about processes and organisation, and less tolerant towards maverick style approach - which is more catheral like, than bazaar like. JCP bazaar strength lies in its ability to canvass industy players together to do specification work in a structured manner.
Sunset over the lake, cool mist over the bridge; A leave upon the ripples, the snow reflects its glow.
What Cathedral are they looking at, or what Linux are they looking at? I haven't received too many source codes of Java in the past 3 years.
~Ilyanep
To get message, take amount of carrier pigeons at each stage mod 2. Then decode binary.
[sarc]Ok, you're right, my post is offtopic.[/sarc]
Frankly, I always hated the whole cathedral vs bazaar metaphor. I don't think it portrays well the virtues and faults of open source and proprietary software. I use proprietary software (MacOS + some closed apps) for the same reason I prefer to "dine out" rather than cook my own meals. I just want to choose something delicious from the restaurant's menu - and I don't care that my choices are limited. Yes, if you cook in your own kitchen, you can customize you meal the way you like it - as it is with open source software. But this will consume you a lot of time and effort, so most people would rather avoid it - unless they really enjoy cooking, have really to much spare time or are really short on cash. It's similar with Free Software - you use it if you really like to 'tinker' with everything or are really short on cash. But if you don't like the former and are not limited by latter, you will rather go to a store with proprietary solutions - where your choices are obviously limited, but you're saving time and effort. So I think restaurant vs kitchen is a better metaphor for proprietary vs free/open.
This seems eerily familiar to a tactic our friends at MS have been using to scare people from Linux. I think sun is scared because they're fast on their way to becoming irrelevent. Of course, there are die-hard sun fans and sun is great because bla bla bla.
I know what those words mean, but that phrase makes no sense.
[The Bazaar model]
is based on the assumption that a million men are wiser than one man. How's that again? I missed something.
[The Cathedral model]
is based on the assumption that one man is wiser than a million men. Let's play that over again, too. Who decides?
R3
Stuff that matters: circuitbreakers, vacuum-cleaners coffee makers, calculators generators, matching salt+pepper shakers
As the sainted Lindsay Marshall pointed out to ESR
at a conference some years ago, cathedrals (which
we know a bit about in Europe) weren't built like
ESR thinks. They were built over the course of
generations, by a sequence of random people, and
if you had the money to put up (say) a side-chapel
for your recently deceased son, you could do so.
In that sense, they are precisely like Linux: a
set of guiding lights, an overall architecture,
and a framework into which anyone with time and
money can put their additions. If you go to one
of the larger, more complex cathedrals in Europe
you'll see they changed massively in plan and
intent over the some hundreds of years they took
to build.
ian
Schwartz spews endless nonsense like McNealy. I like Sun if for no other reason competition is good. I don't subscribe to zealotry for language A vs. language B (I used to... but discovered it's wasted energy and the world doesn't work that way). Sun should stick to producing hardware since that is where they will make money. I must say, for a company that touts Java so much, "Show me the money" comes to mind. Talk is cheap. Sun hasn't made much $$$ on Java... which goes to show a level of ignorance, incompetence and arrogance given all these juxtapositions of Java vs. This or Java vs. That. You can say the aforementioned three items are all sides of the die. McNealy is an idiot, Sun needs new blood. If Schwartz is a "chip off the old block" then woe to Sun.
How can anyone software development take place without some kind of leadership?! If that puts it in the cathedral category, then linux is a bazaar cathedral!
...a cathedral is delivering the Holy Scripture down on people. While Linux may have some of the same structure, it is instead producing it downwards up. Each kernel dev contributes something that, if considered worthy, will be included in the Linux source tree.
Linux is a cathedral only because people find it most effective. Why create conflict, just for the sake of having conflict? Nothing says Linux can't be "wrestled" from Linus' control, just like x.org took xfree, if he drives it in a direction people don't appriciate.
If anything, this tells me that Linux developers very much agree on where Linux is going, unlike KDE/Gnome/Third party WM discussions, dozens of various frameworks and whatnot you see elsewhere in the OSS world.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Jcp is simply a steering committee. Churchs have steering comittes with ulitimately one person or a small group of people who will decide what happens. More importantly, nobody can grab the core code and do their own thing with it.
With Linux, Anybody is free to grab the core code and do what ever they want. More importantly, there are already several versions. Linus has his version and other major developers have theirs. Some distros even distribute none Linus versions.
So no, Linux really is the bazaar.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Taste your own bitter medicine Taco!
Give me a cathedral over a bazaar any day. I can't think of a better situation than having a thoughtful, intelligent leader who considers all the input of the group and then makes moderate suggestions of what should be implemented. Linus is at the top because he's proven that he can make great decisions for such a large project. If he was ever to lose his naturally good judgement, he wouldn't be able to influence the multitudes of developers anyway. I count us as lucky to have him as long as he's willing to help.
A camel is a horse designed by a committee
...but JDK 1.4 certainly had a lot of duplicate code.
The Army reading list
The wisest man listens to the advice of a million men to make the best decision.
If by cathedral they mean one person (or a small tightly controlled group) making the decisions to what goes in and bazaar as in the community making the decisions then I'd say nothing is quite as clear cut.
For a project to be successful you need tight leadership and the ability to say no, but still to have a sense of community and take the best of the feedback from them. The intention of Firefox was to follow the tight leadership route while still building a community which seems to have worked well. They've got an app that's not as cluttered as the Mozilla suite, Opera or all those awful IE shells like Maxthon while still having a community to listen to.
Pot? Kettle calling. Black, black I say! Black!
- Ha Ha! I am the Bazaar and you are the Catherdral.
- Neh uh. I am the Bazaar and you are the Catherdral.
What is wrong with the Catherdral Model and what is so cool about the Bazaar Model. They both have there advantages and disavantage.
These terms are actually both wrong to explain both methods and the Bazaar and the Catherdral models are gross generalizations.
Most Bazaars have someone in charge of it who can make the decision on who can open up shop and who cannot. It may be a group of people or just one person who is incharge.
Most Catherdrals does usually have a single person who makes the decisions but there decsions is often influenced by a group of people to make his decision. And often the man in charge will deligate it to someone else to make the decision. The Catherdral model is more democratic then one realizes.
I many ways That Catherdral and Bazaar are the same model. But it is the way that it is wored that makes one sounds good and one sounds bad. Espectially to a group with a Strong Atheist following. To the majority of the uninformed people In all walks of life and ideals. The see the "Catholic Church" as this singal person makeing all the rules, and the chuch in general as a place you sit down for an hour listening to this guy talk and must try to take his word for it. While the Bazaar has more of a positive tone to it where people are walking about and venders left and right trying to sell you interesting product which you can choose where to go and visit.
It is like saying X is the Rebel and Y are Terrorest. One gives a more positive view then the other but they can both be the same thing.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
You can also obtain and modify Java's code as you wish (see http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/download.jsp) but you can only *distribute* your modifications for the purpose of "research" (so not as part of a commercial product for example).
1 6#linux_is_an_open_source) has aspects of both the cathedral and the bazaar.
r /cathedral-bazaar/index.html) to be an essential read, but it's terminology is IMHO too obscure to be used effectively in discussions like this; I find well-known terms like "dictatorship" (Linux kernel), "meritocracy" (Mozilla.org, "Individual Expert"s on the Java JCP Committee) and "feudal" (GNOME.org) are clearer.
Java is "bazaar"-like because the JCP provides a mechanism for groups and individuals to create proposals to evolve or extend Java which are ratified by a committe (again of groups and individuals, essentially chosen in a meritocratic manner). This could be compared with Mozilla's team of super-reviewers.
Jonathan's point is that Linux (the kernel) is cathedral-like because decisions about changes to the kernel are made exclusively by Linus Torvalds.
Java has open processes for becoming a member of the change committee (see http://www.jcp.org/en/participation/membership) and for submitting proposals (see http://www.jcp.org/en/procedures/jcp2#1).
"Linux" in the broadest sense (see http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/ColmSmyth/200411
I really find Eric Raymond's seminal CATB article (see http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaa
http://blogs.sun.com/ColmSmyth/
Whatever the claims about "Community Process", Sun runs Java and Scott McNealy runs Sun when it really comes down to it. I would suggest asking long term Sun folks(the folks that built that company and were there over 15 year ago) what they really think of that means of governance.
Linux is developed the way it is because it works, after a fashion.
Java is developed the way it is because it works, after a fashion.
Now which method is better is impossinle to tell since Java and Linux do very different things.
If they were both operating systems, you might compare with a bunch of benchmarks, like number of computers installed with it, market share, job vacancies administrating it, whatever, and draw some conclusions. But they're not, so you can't.
This is a bit like saying my way of making ice cream is better than your way of making sports cars.
Perhaps Schwarz should put out the new open source Solaris' with his preferred bazaar-like development model and show Linus and the rest of us how it's done.
The individual kernel project run by Linus might be cathedral-like, but Linux (and free software projects in general) are not. Actually, most free software projects, insofar as they retain an identity, are cathedral like: go to any random project on Sourceforge, and there's essentially no chance that you can commit changes to the codebase without approval from one of the project runners.
To analogize it to the proverbial bazaar, it's like noticing that each individual shop is run with an iron fist by its owner, and then claiming that the whole bazaar is a cathedral because each owner doesn't let his shop be run by any random Joe who comes along.
Yes, Linus manages his shop (project) with an iron fist, but anyone can take the kernel and set up their own shop (project) next door. That's still following the bazaar model.
Being both familiar with Linux and Java, let me propose a different analogy: Linux is like being caressed by milky-skinned maidens, and Java is like being kicked in the nuts by a Visigoth.
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
Schwartz is back and forth hemming and hawing about "Linux" like no one I've ever seen. One week, Linux is evil, then it's the future. Methinks somebody is mad because their fragile userbase is getting swept out from under them.
Ahh to have ops in the tech industry
/mode #techindustry -v jschwartz
(straighten up your business plan hippie!)
Don't forget these people job is to generate news to there product/company - even, or specially, if there is nothing new about it.
I don't have the time to read this type of non event things but sounds pretty much like nothing over nothing.
Schwartz is referring not so much to Linux the kernel, but Linux the OS that is installed in corporate computers - against which he actually competes. That means Red Hat, SuSE, and even other smaller distros, from MontaVista to JoesGarageLinux.com - Sun competes against Linux distros that have passed through Linus' compiler, because that's what corporations install. From that point of view, there is no bazaar, because Sun's corporate customers require the validation by Linus, backed up by each other's use/testing of it. The corporate cult of "me, too" is propped up by such crossreference. So Schwartz is disingenuous in his comparison, because the code Linus validates is collected from a widely distributed community, without Linus dictating priorities and policies. It's a cathedral erected inside a bazaar, with no doors in the doorways, and a loudspeaker preaching the gospel.
Personally, I don't like the idea that all of Linux depends on Linus. What if he gets hit by a bus (driven by a recently "retired" Microserf)? But the chaos ensuing from a disappearing Linus would resolve quickly, though possibly in a Great Schism with multiple inheriting popes across the Net, like *BSD. Time for a new paradigm to overextend, Jonathan.
--
make install -not war
But Perl wasn't designed by committee.
"My Schwartz is bigger than your Schwartz!"
It all comes down to community involvement. And both Linux and Java communities do a very good job at that.
Btw...
Have you ever wondered what would have happened if a more organizationally-minded person ran the kernel development?
Linus is very authoritative, and has yet to form an official public community/legal entity that develops and protects the kernel in the 10 year+ that he has been doing it.
What happens if he gets hit by a bus?
Heck what happens today when large factions of kernel developers disagree with him? ( Kernel debugger )
I am not saying Linus is doing a bad job; but couldn't the Linux kernel as an organization be a lot further than it is today?
Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
>"Linux" as most people understand the term
Breaking news! "Most people are wrong!" Startling new evidence! More on that soon, but first a word from our sponsors.
Ah, the oft-vaunted Write-Once, Run-Everywhere (as long as you have the specific JVM version) nature of Java...
The reason Linus is the final arbiter is because everyone agrees to this. Anyone who doesn't agree is welcome to fork in a new direction. If everyone goes away to something new, then Linus loses his power. Code development continues and this is the way of the bazaar.
The reason Bill Gates is the final arbiter is because he is the boss. Anyone who doesn't agree with him can leave and quit developing Windows code and this is the way of the cathedral.
I don't see the problem and I don't understand how anyone could. It seems pretty open and shut unless, of course, someone is deliberately obtuse. Let's see, stupid or obtuse? Neither choice is very flattering. (Boy am I bitchy this morning. PJ would not be pleased.)
Java with its JCP is more like ESR's Bazaar than Linux, which he dismissed as being "awfully cathedral-like" since Linus is the final arbiter (or Great Dictator), and not a committee."
Camel is a horse designed by a committee.
Robert
Bastard Operator From 193.219.28.162
This doesn't look very bazaar-like.
While perhaps ESR's understanding of cathedral-building is woefully incomplete, I think it was a good enough image to make his point. If you can think of something better that will fill out the argument more completely, you're welcome to do so. If he's a good bazaar participant, he'd be a fool not to pick up on a better competing image.
Linus really is the Great Dictator. In fact, Linus has outright rejected or slowed the progress of many things (stable binary driver API, the initial rejection of kernel pre-emption as "not needed" which is now in the official kernel, etc.).
Completely disregarding Sun in the discussion, is the point still valid?
Of that pony-tailed oik Schwartz.
He is such a jack-off it makes me think that he is an industry sleeper - someone sent to destroy all credibility of Sun.
M$ has thier own monkey boy, a semi-self-styled nut who says anything he wants, and M$ quizzically apologises for him, and does that half eye roll, well he is nuttier than squirrel shit look and hopefully get away with it.
What the fuck are they trying to prove, Linux is an OS, Java is a devleopment platform, what is the point all this rhetorical FUD? Does it make sense man?
I think not. Now to compound matters the sub blurb on this book is:
Musings of open source blah blah by an accidental revolutionary.
WTF? WHO-TF more like... Also, he is a gun nut. Just what we need. ITS GNU NOT GUN you nozz.
http://www.catb.org/~esr/guns/.
Did this make sense to anybody else? Is this Sun's take of M$ OS costs more? Is it just my sugar deprived brain thinking this is all too wierd?
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
Eric S. Raymond has just responded to Sun's Jonathan Schwartz and he says, among other things "any time [Sun] try to use my work to justify retaining proprietary control or argue that Linux is somehow less open, that's either culpable stupidity or dishonesty and they should expect to get kicked in the teeth for it by the entire open-source community, starting with me."
If Microsoft so wants to destroy Linux, why not hire a few dozen developers, create a fork of Linux that is incompatible with Linus' but includes more desireable (likely patented) features than Linus'? They could basically take control of Linux.
... Jonathan is a well-known victim of the serious foot-in-the-mouth disease.
Just like that other disease where people shout obscenities (Touareg? Tornado? Some weird-ass syndrome)
In the same way, you can put additions in Microsoft Windows, or in Sun Java. But, in order to do so, you must be a big corporation, you must pay, and it must be done according to Microsoft's or Sun's specs.
Which is it, guys? You can't have it both ways.
LRC, the best-read libertarian site on the web
I'd take a camel over a horse any day.
http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/paulfitz/spanish/scri pt.html ...' ... our chief weapons are surprise...blah blah blah. Cardinal, read the charges.
The Spanish Inquisition by Monty Python
In the early years of the 16th century, to combat the rising tide of religious unorthodoxy, the Pope gave Cardinal Ximinez of Spain leave to move without let or hindrance throughout the land, in a reign of violence, terror and torture that makes a smashing film. This was the Spanish Inquisition... (this transcript is also available with screen shots from the original)
Chapman: Trouble at mill.
Cleveland: Oh no - what kind of trouble?
Chapman: One on't cross beams gone owt askew on treadle.
Cleveland: Pardon?
Chapman: One on't cross beams gone owt askew on treadle.
Cleveland: I don't understand what you're saying.
Chapman: [slightly irritatedly and with exaggeratedly clear accent] One of the cross beams has gone out askew on the treadle.
Cleveland: Well what on earth does that mean?
Chapman: *I* don't know - Mr Wentworth just told me to come in here and say that there was trouble at the mill, that's all - I didn't expect a kind of Spanish Inquisition.
[The door flies open and Cardinal Ximinez of Spain [Palin] enters, flanked by two junior cardinals. Cardinal Biggles [Jones] has goggles pushed over his forehead. Cardinal Fang [Gilliam] is just Cardinal Fang]
Ximinez: NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition! Our chief weapon is surprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... Our two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Our *three* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope.... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as fear, surprise.... I'll come in again.
[The Inquisition exits]
Chapman: I didn't expect a kind of Spanish Inquisition.[The cardinals burst in]
Ximinez: NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition! Amongst our weaponry are such diverse elements as: fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope, and nice red uniforms - Oh damn!
[To Cardinal Biggles] I can't say it - you'll have to say it.
Biggles: What?
Ximinez: You'll have to say the bit about 'Our chief weapons are
Biggles: [rather horrified]: I couldn't do that...
[Ximinez bundles the cardinals outside again]
Chapman: I didn't expect a kind of Spanish Inquisition.[The cardinals burst in]
Biggles: Er.... Nobody...um....
Ximinez: Expects...
Biggles: Expects... Nobody expects the...um...the Spanish...um...
Ximinez: Inquisition.
Biggles: I know, I know! Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition. In fact, those who do expect Ximinez: Our chief weapons are...
Biggles: Our chief weapons are...um...er...
Ximinez: Surprise...
Biggles: Surprise and --
Ximinez: Okay, stop. Stop. Stop there - stop there. Stop. Phew! Ah!
Fang: You are hereby charged that you did on diverse dates commit heresy against the Holy Church. 'My old man said follow the--'
Biggles: That's enough.
[To Cleveland] Now, how do you plead?
Clevelnd: We're innocent.
Ximinez: Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha![DIABOLICAL LAUGHTER]
Biggles: We'll soon change your mind about that! [DIABOLICAL ACTING]
Ximinez: Fear, surprise, and a most ruthless-- [controls himself with a supreme effort] Ooooh! Now, Cardinal -- the rack!
[Biggles produces a plastic-coated dish-drying rack. Ximinez looks at it and clenches his teeth in an effort not to lose control. He hums heavily to cover his anger]
Ximinez: You....Right! Tie her down.
[Fang and Biggles make a pathetic attempt to tie her on to the drying rack]
Ximinez:Right! How do you plead?
Clevelnd: Innocent.
Ximinez: Ha! Right! Cardinal, give the rack [oh dear] give the rack a turn.
[Biggles stands their awkwardly and shrugs his shoulders]
Biggles: I....
Ximinez: [gritting his teeth] I *know*, I know you can't. I didn't want to say anything. I just wanted to t
That cannot happen legally. Yes, Microsoft CAN fork the Linux kernel. Yes, Microsoft CAN make changes to it. But the moment you put something into the kernel's source code that is patent encumbered, and distribute it, it then violates the GNU General Public Licence, which is where we then see lawsuits come up from.
Microsoft could attempt to make those changes and distribute a closed source binary version of the Linux kernel, but that too, would violate the GPL, and cause lawsuits from the FSF.
Not to mention that if they created a version that was 'incompatible' with Linus' kernel at a binary level, who would use it?
The Spanish Inquisition (Monty Python)
.ogg File. )
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The Spanish Inquisition was one of the most popular Monty Python sketches. The principal catchphrase in this sketch was "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!"
Nobody in their right mind could have expected this form of Spanish Inquisition, in which the inquisitors proceed to use such extremities of torture as poking with soft cushions and forcible seating in a comfy chair as a means of forcing a heretic (a housewife) to recant. This Inquisition has a hard time starting to inquisit, as they get bogged down in recitations of their chief weapons, among which are fear, surprise, a ruthless efficiency, an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope, and nice red uniforms. (Listen: 15 seconds audio sample
This was a recurring sketch, always predicated by an irritated character announcing, "I didn't expect a kind of Spanish Inquisition", at which point the Inquisition, consisting of Cardinal Ximinez (Michael Palin), Cardinal Biggles (Terry Jones), and Cardinal Fang (Terry Gilliam) would burst into the room and Ximinez would shout, with particular emphasis on the first syllable, "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!" This has become a fairly widespread catchphrase.
In the original TV episode the Spanish Inquisition made several "unexpected" appearances, until at the very end of the show they were caught by surprise. As the closing credits rolled the Inquisitors raced to where they weren't expected, only to arrive just as the words THE END appeared, Ximinez crying "Nobody expects the Sp...oh, bugger!" (which, incidentally, was a pretty strong word for a BBC comedy show at the time).
This sketch may have been an inspiration for "the Inquisition" portion of the movie History of the World Part I.
See also : Monty Python's Flying Circus
This is the same guy who wants to redine words to suit his meaning -- even the term 'Open Source' itself:8 #rewriting_history_and_vocabulary/
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/jonathan/2004080
If Microsoft so wants to destroy Linux, why not hire a few dozen developers, create a fork of Linux that is incompatible with Linus' but includes more desireable (likely patented) features than Linus'? They could basically take control of Linux.
Ah, that's the genius of the GPL. I think that any attempt to "take control" is going to be very difficult without attracting a community of developers (unlikely with MS) and staying far enough ahead of the competition. Well, if the code is GPL'd, then the competition isn't going to be very far behind.
I tend to think not. "There's more than one way to do it" is a phrase I associate with the Perl language--probably the best example of an open development process applied to language development. I don't recall Larry Wall micro-managing the process, enforcing special licensing requirements on developers of Perl programming tools or sending nasty-grams to developers for using the name "Perl" in a project title.
By and large, the source for Perl and its libraries is wide open (I believe the "artistic license" allows the code to be "stolen" for proprietary use..not sure though). Despite the "lack of discipline" Perl is quite consistent between platforms. I've written some pretty fancy Perl that runs without modification on my Linux box as well as in the ActiveState perl on Microsoft Windows.
I think Python and Ruby are also quite open and neither seems to have problems with forking or undue platform incompatibilities. I don't think that it matters if it is open or proprietary, headed by a "benevolent dictator" or designed by committee in terms of design stability and compatibility. If the leaders are responsive and genuinely considerate to users and other developers needs then it will result in success.
If it was indeed true that Linus was becoming beligerent or uncooperative (I see no indicatoin of that) then the license allows disgruntled users to produce a fork that addresses those needs. If Sun and/or the 900 or so merchants in their "bazaar" become disconnected then...well you're SOL and have to invent your own alternative/derivative and it had better not have a coffee-related name (and it has happened--I do not think it was MS' fault alone that it created an incompatible Java and its own alternative in C#--Sun created the environment that allowed it to happen). Open projects are also not immune to the problem--XFree86 for example. In the end though things sort themselves out and we get Linux and Perl and Apache and Mozilla/Firefox and a whole host of successful applications (even closed ones--MS Office and Visual Studio.NET are pretty successful by many measures by and large because they cater to the user's needs).
Now that's a bazaar...
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
BWAH HAAHAHAHAHAAAHAHAHA!!!!!
AHA! AHA!! Ahhhaa!
No seriously this from the heirarchy of the people that brought you the Java API. The people who won't let ANYONE see their code. The people who dictate the form of java's every bytecode sequence. From the people who, by dictat, change, chop, depreciate and set every possible standard for java.
Compared to Sun, the catholic church is an anarchical movement. Compared to Sun, the Linux developers are like a diverging chaotical fractal matrix in 17 dimensions.
May the Maths Be with you!
What was once a nice elegant language is gradually starting to crumble. As always when a new feature is added to a language people will try and find uses for it (rather than only using it if they really really have to) and we will end up with an unholy mess of hard to maintain code.
You lucky fucker, he merely chewed on mine....
Is anyone else troubled by the fact that the article is written by "i-Technology News Desk". How about a name? I'm suspicious of most of what come out of LinuxWorld, aka Linux Business Week, aka SYS-CON. You can thank Maureen O'Gara for that.
Meh. This Schwartz chap is an idiot. Even bazaars have shopkeepers to control the comings and goings. The "anyone can come" element of the bazaar model is not total anarchy, but controlled contribution. Has he ever actually thought about some of the monstrosities that have been brought about by committee design? Oh yeah, I guess he has. He was talking about Java, after all....
well to me anyway...
I consider development to be in a cathedral when the primary focus is on getting the software to do x, y, and z features.
I consider development to be a bazaar when the primary focus is on how features x, y, and z can be best implemented.
Based on this, I suggest that Java is more cathedralish than Linux simply because the Java core methodology and implementation rubs too many people the wrong way, yet there is little they can do about it. It is what it is.
I think the community is underestimating Microsoft's cunning.
Software built on Linux doesn't have to be GPL. Microsoft can therefore, port Office and other apps to run only on their version of Linux. They could even possibly port their API so that Windows apps run on their version of Linux. If/once enough people start using the MSLinux, the control it.
Could the community keep up? Probably but they'd be keeping up with Microsoft which is hardly a position of leadership.
Star was a 3rd party product which was bought by Sun. I am happy they GPLed it, allowing for OO.org, but that does not make it a Sun innovation. ferthermore, OO.org and StarOffice is not a innovation, mearly an implemntation.
Oninoshiko
Woah, maybe it's like there's a cathedral, and the bazaar is INSIDE the cathedral. That blows my mind.
But, whatever changes they made to M$Linux to support their crap would be GPL. So RH and the others could also run Microsoft Office and whatever other apps ran. Microsoft might maintain "leadership", but its monopoly would be dead!
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
Can we please have a moritorium on stories from Linuxworld? That site feeds on stiring up stupid controversies. They cover 75% of their page with ads because they don't need regular readers - they just print shit about Linux and wait for the slashdot effect. Doesn't anybody remember the AIX source code fiasco?
The reason people get confused about the Cathedral and the Bazaar, and why Schwartz isn't the first to consider Linux pretty cathedral like, is that the way real cathedrals were generally built pretty closely followed ESR's "bazaar" metaphor, with thousands of just-ordinary-folks with a huge variety of skills popping in to do their part. The architect/builder (or builders, for many cathedrals took generations to reach their final form) had far less control over the implementation than Linus does.
Eric really needs to take a step or two back and ask if he really said what he thought he said.
What you see is that Sun owns the specifications. Sun also has a lifetime membership in the JCP, and they effectively decide at their discretion whether your implementation conforms or not. Java/JCP isn't a bazaar, it's the Catholic Church, with Sun being the infallible Pope and making all the final decisions and a bunch of cardinals that provide volunteer labor as part of the JCP (you can figure out for yourself what position they want you to assume).
As for Schwartz's comments about Linux, Linus gets to run the show because he delivers results, not because he has any special status. That's what makes Linux a "bazaar"--it can be forked and it has been forked. On the other hand, Sun gets to run the show with Java only because they have kept Java proprietary; they know full well that as soon as they free Java and make their implementation open source, they'll lose control because they have been doing such a poor job.
Schwartz seems to live by the credo of another well-known propagandist, that if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, no matter how preposterous it may be. He sees his empire crumbling and in poverty, pines for its past glories, and wants to make a last ditch effort to take over the world. Let's not let it come to that. The best defense against Sun's propaganda and campaign of misinformation is to read and think for yourself: read their licenses and think about them and their consequences carefully. What Schwartz says doesn't matter; what matters is their licenses and intellectual property.
Sun's role is a lot more like a plurality party in parliament. Sun can't just run roughshod over the other members in the JCP, but they do drive the agenda for the most part. That doesn't mean that somebody like IBM can't block that agenda though, particularly if there are changes that are perceived to be stricly in Sun's interest and not for the J2EE community at large.
I'm always amused about how easy large scale enterprise application development is in your typical
--Rob
Towards the Singularity.
most the jobs in my area are for java. which i cant stand. gotta pay the bills tho. and there is _nothing_ for linux >:(
so yeah, stay with the java. i see C jobs here and there, but mostly java. and i've yet to see a python job in my area (minneapolis minnesota)
Sun could turn the standard over to an independent committee. They don't want to do that. You can argue the merits (or lack thereof) of their position but that's a different conversation and isn't comparable to Linus' control of the kernel (which is arguably an implementation of the POSIX standard.)
For the billionth time, Java IS run by a standards body - the JCP. Sun has a vote on future changes to Java, just like many other companies - such as IBM. JSR's are as valid a standard as anything POSIX.
Do you think IBM (or other companies) would have got so on board with Java if the process for changing the language was not open?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Of course Linux is a Cathedral, and so is Java!
z arre.html. It makes the point better then I can.
Read this http://reddun.blogspot.com/2004/08/there-is-no-bi
must have been a good committee
First they ignore you, ...
Then they laugh at you,
Then they fight you,
Then
Sure their kernel changes would be GPL but they would be controlling kernel development. This is an attack that won't hurt Microsoft at all. They produce a Linux kernel that is incompatible with Linus'. The effect is either to fragment Linux (if Linus chose not to accept Microsoft's changes) or to control future kernel development (if Linus has to accept all Microsoft's changes). Either is good for Microsoft. For example, Microsoft can simply choose to make the kernel incompatible with Linus' by implementing features that they are fairly certain Linus will not incorporate (fragement from a 1.x kernel?).
Once they have fragmented the kernel they can gain market share for MSLinux by porting Office to it or simply offering superior support but they really won't need to because they'll already have damaged Linux simply by fragementing it, showing how easy it is to create different, unique, incompatible versions.
How many distributions do you see of SunOS? How many distributions do you see of Linux? Who's really the bazaar?
ESR of course argues that Linux and other OS is the bazaar, and MS and other proprietary software is the Cathedral.
In the essay, the Cathedral does *not* represent Microsoft. The Cathedral actually is a style of open source software project where the number of developers is limited and the work is centrally directed according to some plan. The classic examples are GNU HURD, Emacs, and gcc.
The Bazaar analogy is applied to a style of project management in which patches are accepted from a great variety of sources and applied by the project coordinator(s).
The classic examples are Fetchmail and the linux kernel. In his essay, ESR characterizes Fetchmail development as being directed by almost entirely by its users, who develop patches to scratch some personal itch (no, not that kind of itch!). The patches are sent to ESR, who rolls them into new versions.
I personally think that ESR vastly overstates his case.
The linux kernel is more a mix of cathedral and bazaar. The linux kernel does not have a steering committee or other formal bureaucracy that I'm aware of, but development is not chaotic, it is not to scratch a personal itch. Development planning is done more by consensus, with the kernel hackers letting everyone know what they're working on, and getting an idea from Linus what is needed before he will add the patch can be added to his releases. The 'bazaar' element is a good description of how individual drivers are written, but larger pieces of architecture are actually coordinated fairly closely, especially when compared to fetchmail.
This really points out why the bazaar model is not equally useful for all projects. On a project like fetchmail, it makes a lot of sense to accept various doodads from individual users who are motivated by what they need from the software.
But on a project like gcc, Gecko, or many parts of the kernel, that kind of development wouldn't going to work very well. For those projects it's much more important that the code is reasonably fast, produces correct results, and is not too bloated. It is still important for the management of the project to be 'open' by welcoming new developers, being open-minded, seeking a variety of opinions, and avoiding the formation of cliques. But this is certainly not inconsistent with a 'cathedral' style of development.
Mod me (-1, Flamebait) if you must, but know that in doing so, you'll only prove my point.
And so, does the score of your post undermine your complaint?
And if so, does that make it wrong such that we should moderate it down, thus apparently revalidating your point... ?
The use of bazaar and cathedral as metaphors is flawed anyway - bazaars are always, always run by oligopolies, either honest (guilds) or otherly (robbers etc), and always at a cost. Any changes to the process of a bazaar is intensely involved, as it inovlves all prior stakeholders, and the ultimate decision lies in the hands of the oligoploy. Cathedrals on the other hand have a policy of welcoming anyone, and offering free education since the time of Augustine to become part of the process - in other words based on competence and capabilties. Magister Ludi (Hesse) is a rather nice case of a purely intellectual and secular cathedral culture that fits into the role that ESR wanted for bazaar, and most local fleamarkets are based on the executive oligopoly model that ESR wanted for cathedral. This is basically because historical occurences work very badly as metaphors, because they were hardly ever consistent or coherent enough for the generic terms used for them.
so use a long and get over it.
There are plently of legitimate reasons for not liking java, but that isn't one of them, it just shows your inability to cope with change.
It's akin to saying you hate java because it uses the keyword "import" instead of "use".
Advanced users are users too!
The JCP is not a standards body. You can keep saying that it is but that won't make it true.
Well I'd love to hear your definition of a standards body then. There are many standards bodies, just because something is not ISO certified does not mean it's not a standard. Just because YOU don't think it's one does not make it so. I think I might have to go with the vast array of companies that participate in the process on this one.
Can you create a whole implementation from the specs provided by the JCP? Check.
Is each JSR overseen by a panel of people from a variety of companies? Check.
Can anyone propose or comment on standards? Check. Wait! You can't do that with an ISO standard, I guess that's your problem - not enough backroom deals and too much openess in the process.
As a concrete example, consider J2ME now widley deployed in many cell phones across the world. There are many, many cell phone makers that embed Java now. How could they do that without a standard to define what J2ME is? Thus you have the JSR's around J2ME. That is a real standard, as much as you might like to deny it.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Oh, the poor little AC doesn't even have the guts to come forward and argue the point since you know you'll loose. Poor looser AC!! Always wishing he could be right for once... Sigh!! Keep trying little AC user!! Keep trying!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
>> I get an email that says, "Please pull." I pull it. It's done. And that's very convenient.
I bet he's glad he's not running Windows. A guy like that could get a worm.
...these aren't my real teeth.
The kernel is the cathederal, all the bits tacked onto the kernel are the Bazaar, all set out with stalls, called Redhat, Kde, Suse, Debian, Gnome, Mandrake, I could go on, but it would get boring after a while and yes of course Linus is the Pope, and he has his high priests and magicians as well.
People like Gates have a hobby of making money. People like Torvalds have a hobby of making good things. People used to think it was good idea to own other people AKA slavery (tm), all that has happened is, that they transfered the concept from owning people to owning ideas. Owning ideas is morally reprehensible, ideas want to be FREE.