Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Open Sources 2.0

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the required-reading-test-next-thursday dept.

dpilgrim writes "O'Reilly has just released a successor volume to 1999's "Open Sources", entitled "Open Sources 2.0". The table of contents reveals contributions from a number of open source luminaries, including Mozilla's Mitchell Baker, Samba's Jeremy Allison, and Sleepycat's Michael Olson. There's also an essay co-authored by Slashdot's own Jeff Bates. The sample chapter is the introduction, and includes an entertaining riff on the parallels between the open source community and the Burning Man community. This volume is edited by two of the original three editors, Chris DiBona (former Slashdot editor) and Mark Stone, together with Danese Cooper. You might want to compare this with the original "Open Sources", whose entire text can be found online."

3 of 50 comments (clear)

  1. It takes a community... by fak3r · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This book should be much more relevant now that the 'dot-com' hype has disappated and people can see the fruits of real community supported development. When you see how poorly properitary software companies are run (I'm talking about the ones I('ve) work(ed) for); things like that are not tolerated in OSS. If push comes to shove (I'm looking at you XFree86) a fork may develop giving users a true option that could become superior to it's ancestor. The burning man ref seems a bit off, as that's not people being realy, it's a vacation. OSS is real in that real work gets done by someone everyday (unlike me at my job...)

    --
    fak3r.com
  2. The book has been slashdotted... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    There's also an essay co-authored by Slashdot's own Jeff Bates. The sample chapter is the introduction, and includes an entertaining riff on the parallels between the open source community and the Burning Man community. This volume is edited by two of the original three editors, Chris DiBona (former Slashdot editor)

    Does this mean it's full of typoos, dupes, articles with links that don't reference the actual article, and pictures of goatse?

    And do you have to type the word in the image to read the book?

    (mind reading capcha="bullocks")

  3. Wack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's completely wack when a book about the "open-source" movement is only sold and not available online for free.