Slashdot Mirror
Help the Linux OpenBook Project
The reason I wonder if this project (which I think is an excellent idea) will draw enough support is that it's facing stiff competition from commercial publishers. The market for Linux books is so hot right now that one New York literary agent I know, Lisa Swayne, is literally begging for Linux authors.
While much Linux software is free, books about it cost plenty. An awful lot of people, including me, have noticed this and are not happy about it. Writing is not that much different from coding. In many ways. the two tasks are different applications of the same talents, and the way writers and coders work is quite similar, especially the fact that people who are good (or want to get good) at either task often become so obsessed with their work that they give up almost everything else in their lives. Given this similarity, why should people who write about free software almost invariably get paid, while people who write free software are expected to "contribute to the community" without getting any money in return?
Personally, I believe it is the duty of any writer or editor who uses free software to donate his or her skills to the community, just as programmers who use free software often contribute bugfixes and patches even if they aren't heavily involved in kernel or applications development. We each can and should contribute in our own way.
But now Linux is going big-time, and publishers move in packs just as surely as Wall Street investors, so suddenly there's competition for anyone who can write competently about Linux. I believe this is going to lead to a lot of bad books, just as the explosion of science fiction's popularity in the 1970s led to the publication of many SF novels that never should have been printed.
I believe Open Source books have the potential to be better and more useful manuals than those written under commercial pressure. Editing is the writer's equivalent of debugging. Just as good programmers often spend more time debugging than actually writing code, good writers often spend more time editing their work than typing their first drafts.
If you are a programmer who can write, or a writer who understands programming, I urge you to donate at least a little of your precious time to either of the two Open Source writing projects mentioned above, or to one of the many other worthwhile ones that have sprung up elsewhere.
Sure, there's lots of pressure to spend every waking moment making money coding or writing, but doing the same work without deadline pressure, for love instead of money, at least a few hours every week, will not only make you feel better about yourself, but may also help you improve your skills in ways you cannot when you're cranking out copy or code against a commercial deadline.
Note: this story was posted briefly earlier, then pulled when we discovered that LinuxWorld's servers weren't responding. Now, at 1:13 EDT, LinuxWorld is back up, so the links all work. - ed
While I think this could be a good idea, I question the assertion that the people involved with Linux (coders, writers, et.al) should not get paid (if they can) for their work.
It's true that many of us write code for the fun of it, and I suspect that there are many writers (even technical ones) that also write because they enjoy it, and would do it whether they get paid or not.
However, as many before me have argued, we don't have to separate Open Source from economic gain. Many of our favorite Linux coders are getting paid for Linux coding, do we grudge them that merely because the rest of us are doing it for free (or nearly so)? It is frequently argued that support is the most meaningful economic model for Open Source projects, in that you can get the software gratis, and you get the support at some cost (either you take the time to learn to do it yourself, or you lob a little cash to someone who is able to teach you).
I think the idea of an 'Open Book' is pretty cool, and almost certainly do-able. And it would be interesting to see how it would turn out, especially if there were many contributors. But if an author can make money writing a Linux book, I would say go for that if you can, just as if they could make the money writing Linux code.
Nunc Tutus Exitus Computarus.
Dumb question?
/.'er can name 5 famous programmers, but can they name famous tech writers (without looking at your bookshelf)? Let's see, Peter Norton, and, umm, Xian Crumlish.
Maybe, but I think one of the reason there are lots of programmers writing Linux and Open Source software is that they hope for a little fame and peer recognition.
Just about any
Writing documentation never seems to get the respect that programming does. So why would someone want to write for free if they can't even get a fraction of the respect that Torvalds, Tridgell or Becker gets? Can you see some hot startup wooing a tech writer because of their clear, expository pose? Can you see a startup letting an Open Source tech writer get in on their IPO? Do you ever hear of tech writers cashing in and retiring at 30?
George
While better literature on linux is needed, why books? Large, clunky, expensive, environmentally unfriendly, wouldn't it be better to write some good online materials about linux? As linux seems to be changing so fast, wouldn't online materials, be easier to keep up to date as well?
The HOWTOs are a good first step but aimed at the user that is a bit more familiar with linux already than someone who might buy a book about unix. I'd suggest something along the lines of what Sun has done with Java. They have the Java API index of everything which is much like the linux HOWTOs: Lots of info, but you have to have some idea what you are looking for/at before it makes any sense. Then they have the Java Tutorial that starts with the basics and dumbs stuff down enough that anybody capable of programming in Java should be able to start there. Its worked for me in Java. I don't feel that I need more references.
How about a linux tutorial that tells the user what they can do, and links to HOWTOs and new material to help somebody accomplish what they want?
The book outline starts out with "What kind of server do you want" and goes from there. A book for "Essential Server Linux" is a fine idea, but I'd hate to see someone looking for something about Linux on the desktop (or embedded, or wearable, or whatever) pick this up.
Nothing against documentation, mind, but anyone calling a book "Essential Linux" and planning on it being only about servers is misguided.
How about a series? "Essential Server Linux", "Essential Desktop Linux", "Essential Wearable Linux", "Essential Toaster Linux", etc...
-- Alastair
The definition of "book" can be broader - I would expect the OpenBook to be available online, with publishers allowed to publish the book physically - kinda like: the linux kernel + all pkgs are available online, but you can buy distribution CDs if you like.
How do you interpret, "While not mandatory, you should offer a free copy of the modifications, whether in print or on CD-ROM, to the original author(s) and to IDGB."?
Does this mean that they don't have to make the text of the book available for download? The part of copyleft that really makes it work is that you have to give out source code on request. It sounds like they're trying an "almost-free" way to get people to write books for them. They profit and the writers get nada. Great deal!
I, for one, would not participate in this...
I can just imagine LinuxWorld's reaction.
"400% load increase? What the hell... OH MY GOD, IT'S SLASHDOT. Everyone turn all the servers off, maybe they'll think nobobdy's home."
"We can't do that, Simon."
"Hell we can't. Now get off the floor, call VA and get me more systems. This isn't gonna be fun."
(:
Yahoo! Pipes are awesome. How awesome? http://pipes.yahoo.com/jesdynf/slashdot