Slashdot Mirror
It's Not the 15th Birthday of Linux
Glyn Moody writes "There's been a spate of celebrations of Linux's 15th birthday recently. What they're really marking is the 15th anniversary of version 1.0. But do version numbers matter for free software? The 'release early, release often' approach means there's generally little difference between version 0.99.14z, say, and version 1.0. In fact, drawing attention to such anniversaries is misguided, because it gives the impression that free software is created in the same way as traditional proprietary code, working towards a predetermined end-point according to a top-down plan. So how should we be choosing and celebrating free software's past achievements?"
Free software isn't developed according to the same models as proprietary software. We get that. It's just backwards to complain about how people take the time to celebrate the achievements of free software developers.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
I've always thought "release early, release often" is a terrible idea. That just means all your end-users will see the crap you're working on before you do the testing, and get a bad impression of your software right from the get-go. It makes sense to do that *after* you hit 1.0 and have a pretty clean product, but why would you want people forming their first impression of your software from untested development releases?
Comment of the year
Version numbers matter to the average user. If you have a product that takes years to break version 1.0, the uninitiated will wonder why it took you so long to "get it working." This question is another example of how many FOSS developers and advocates don't understand the basic psychology of the masses.
Isn't the most logical Linux birthday when Linus first posted his code for others to improve upon? If memory serves me correctly it was a Usenet post?
.: Max Romantschuk
It's a different way of counting.
You can consider software (such as Linux) beginning as the first line of code is written, or when the idea was first conceived, or when it was first on the internet, etc. Most people consider version 1.0 to be more of the official "birth" of software.
It's a different way of counting.
Both are correct when thinking of them from different perspectives. To understand this requires mental flexibility in your ways of thinking.
As a further illustration:
The argument presented in both the article and summary:
there's generally little difference between version 0.99.14z, say, and version 1.0
There's generally little difference between a fetus the day before it's born and the day after it's born. But culture generally starts counting after it's born and not at conception. Computer culture often starts counting at v1.0
Despite the quite correct statement by a few people that the millenium changed Jan 1 2001, the vast majority of people ignored that and celebrated the arrival of 2000 as the new millenium. No matter how right you are about Linux's age etc., the vast majority will completely fail to notice you and your dogmatic assertions, and will enjoy themselves in spite of you.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
If you think about birthdays among people, they don't simply grow on the date of their birth. They are constantly growing and learning and developing. Birthdays are commemmorative events that celebrate when someone joined a specific family (or the human family in general). That's really not that different than what you described regarding open sources software.
Perhaps "anniversary" would be a better term. A marriage rarely has its beginnings at the altar or in front of the justice of the peace. The persons involved typically began interacting with each other, learning, and growing together before the date of the actual ceremony, yet we celebrate their anniversary on the date they made their public vows in front of witnesses. I can see a parallel between pre-release and beta editions culminating with a public 1.0 release (or whatever the given name or number of a product may be). I don't see it as a disservice to the open source community to mark such milestones. In fact, if they were to describe the development process similarly to how I described it here--as an ongoing, growing, developing thing--it might actually mean more to some people.
In any case, observing a birthday or anniversary holds powerful meaning regardless of the context (human or inanimate): it means the person or the thing survived the test of time. That's why so many businesses are quick to proclaim "...since 1933", "...established 2006", or similar sentiments that convey age. They understand that people tend to trust established brands, thinking (consciously or subconsciously), "if they've been around that long, they can't be too bad," or, "if they've been around that long, there's a good chance they'll still be around in a few years if I need to exercise my warranty rights."
So, for me, I'll say happy anniversary Linux. You've had a good start. I'm looking forward to what the next 50 years will bring.
I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
A lack of planning and having defined goals is not the same as working in a new and different way. If a survey of the most successful open source project was to be done I would put money on every single one having a strong plan and good leadership. Fair enough that leadership might be technical rather than the typical management type but it would be there.
This whole "we won't call it 1.0 till it does everything perfectly" thinking smacks of childishness to me. Set some goals and publish them along with version numbers so that people know what to expect when. FFmpeg is a prime example of a project that should be 5.0 not 0.5. It's a mature, feature rich and stable lump of code that is in widespread use. Give it a version number that reflect that.
I used to have a better sig but it broke.
What's so special about the 0xFth anniversary anyway? Shouldn't we be waiting for next year and celebrating the 0x10th anniversary?
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
The two actually have nothing to do with each other. Many "proprietary" software projects are done in an incremental, release-often mode. Many "free" software projects are done in a waterfall, plan-design-code-test-release mode.
By promulgating this myth, you are actually doing free software a big disservice, by limiting it to a certain style of development.
Go away, ponder, then come back and repent.
the first time a slacker sneered derisively at a red hat user. a.k.a. the beginning of the distro wars.
lose != loose
Not our saviour, your saviour. But I was trying not to go down the path of denouncing my faith, to save from hurting your feeling. But as we are now currently on said path, and as many people have pointed out; Christmas was a pagan festival that was adopted by Christians. Santa stole a holiday of Christians....who stole a holiday.
Who? Who is but the form following the function of what and what I am is a man in a mask.
Why bother being offended by what someone else says? I believe in the divinity of Christ, and the things I say will reflect that. Others believe that he didn't exist, or was just a man, or a charlatan, or a lunatic....regardless, I don't have evidence either way. Just belief. Why should someone be upset that: 1. different people believe different things and 2. people act upon the things they believe?
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
I celebrate Linux everyday of all the years.
Obama is a twitter sock puppet