Slashdot Mirror
Why Oracle Isn't Part of the OSDL
darthcamaro writes "Some may wonder why OSDL, the self-proclaimed center of gravity for the Linux Universe and employer of Linus Torvalds, does not include Oracle as a member. Well, in a recent interview Wim Coekaerts, Director of Linux Engineering at Oracle has spelled it out in no uncertain terms. From the article: 'The thing that was really kind of revolting is that OSDL goes out and basically says that they represent the Linux community while there is no direct feedback line back to the community.'"
They're in competition with MySQL.
What he's saying is that they're fine on their own, and that they're trying to avoid some of the problems that the OSDL has.
Summary put a bit of spin on that one.
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. --Winston Churchill
Very few members of OSDL are actually kernel-producers. Oracle could well be on their place in OSDL because they could have a certain influence in the direction Linux is heading, as well as paying for it (no small thing to pay Linus).
But my question is: why is MySQL AG not a member? (some above stated they where, as a reason Oracle isn't. Look at the memberlist on osdl.org before making such bold statements)
Or when "producer of Linux" is THE requirement (I think it shouldn't): why are Linspire Inc. and Canonical Ltd. not members?
Free beer is never free as in speech. Free speech is always free as in beer.
Carrier Grade means reliable enough that the phone company and other major data carriers would use it to run a switch. That means between 99.999% and 99.99999% uptime, or between 5 about minutes and 30 seconds of total downtime per year.
e nce/reality_five_nines_20020519301.htm
Actually, according to this page:
http://www.bcr.com/management/networking_intellig
OS failure does not count when the mythical "5 nines" is measured.
The way it was explained to me when I was in telephony was that the 99.999% applied only to getting a dialtone. That is, you didn't actually have to be able to call anyone, just that your line would produce that pleasing tone in your ear.
Everytime Slashdot mentions Linux, you bring up wyoGuide as though it's some magic bullet that would fix everything if only every Linux user started adhering to it. I've decided to respond this time instead of move on.
/usr/bin, application data (including app-specific libraries) in /usr/lib/appname, documentation in /usr/share/doc/appname, and top-level configuration file in /etc/appname(.conf) . Desktop Windows applications ported to Linux should use this standard, not some dump-it-all-in-one-place-any-structure-you-want Windows-style solution (which you call "the easiest solution").
Here are the problems I've got with wyoGuide:
1) It assumes that developers should make new Linux applications that look and behave like established Windows applications circa 1997. Even Windows applications don't do this anymore, and users seem more than happy to use applications with skinnable eye candy rather than Office 97 menus.
2) The example language is C++, and the example toolkit is wxWindows. There are plenty of other cross-platform GUI toolkits, and other languages include cross-platform GUI as a core feature. You'll get more traction if you include more languages (Java would be a good choice, as many CS students are taught that now) and other toolkits.
3) The screenshots are all Windows. Sorry, I've got NO applications on my Linux desktop that look like that. Include some OS X and Linux screenshots and maybe people from the non-Windows side will begin listening.
4) As with #3, your tone in the document and in your Slashdot posts seems to put most of the blame on Linux developers for not making their applications resemble Windows, and then you go on inside the document and make wrong statements about non-Windows platforms:
a) Section 10.1: Linux already has a defacto standard for application paths: binary/symlink in
b) Section 6.1: preferences dialog. Many Mac applications do not have "Apply" or "OK" buttons, they simply apply immediately and you close the window to get out.
c) Section 3.7: On Linux, the Ctrl key is Ctrl, the Alt key is often called "Meta" but modern desktops often just leave it as Alt. Any Linux app that used Alt-C/X/V instead of Ctrl-C/X/V would be broken.
5) More of the "at all costs, make it resemble Windows" criteria in Section 3: "The standard entries in the file menu have their defined command keys as shown in the sample, if they have any. These keys are reserved and may not used elsewhere, not even if the corresponding menu entry is missing." I see that menu and think Office 97 (except that the editing filenames should be below Quit). Some applications might want those keys for other things, and some users might want to remap those functions to other keys.
6) What about keyboard accelerators, ala Alt-F -> File menu dropdown? If you're going to mandate/suggest the keyboard shortcuts, you may as well include the accelerators too.
7) You mention the Windows registry barely in passing in Section 6.3. It needs more than that: Windows applications must use the registry _correctly_ such that non-admin users can use their application.
8) You added a section for coding style? Now I'm beginning to think that you might not actually write a lot of code.
In short, when I read wyoGuide, I see a document telling me how to use one language with one toolkit to make an inconsistent Windows-like application with some "helpful" newb tips at the end.
Let me offer some suggestions:
1) Move the code snippets out to separate links. We're talking HCI design, not "low-level" implementation. Coders can always click the links to see source code snippets. And an HTML page with annotated source that links BACK to the wyoGuide would be nice.
2) Focus on successful applications that have already proven themselves cross-platform, such as Mozilla, Abiword, Gaim, LyX, etc. Show screenshots