so, let's suppose you learn that slashdot is going to mention your server. what you do then is the following procedure: 1) beg-borrow-steal every spare computer you can lay your hands on. 2) install aux-server stuff on each 3) config them to backfill for your main server 4) weather the slashdot hurricane 5) return everybody's computers with a smile.
obviously, servers see a bursty duty cycle, so why not let the sysop do a quick reshuffling of hardware.
it is true that no act of coding or anything else is truly "apolitical." it is also true that it is imprudent to "shut up and code." i was wrong before to take a tack that implied this.
where is civility in political process? none of us are worrying about howto soak the rich, perpetuate the welfare state, or get the government off our backs.
it possible for men of good will to disagree without calling each other evil, parasites, or pointy-haired? indeed, our medium is prone to flamage. and the fear of all of us is that the flower of free software will be crushed by the forces of darkness. true, we must take council of our fears. yet, we mustn't let them dictate to us. we're all smart guys, and we're all opinionated guys, and we all immediately suspect that he who disagrees with us is misinformed or misguided.
we *want* the same thing "what" and some of us disagree on the "how" to get it. so, if some of us follow different paths, we're merely instantiating the distributed, decentralized, free software way. if there are multiple ways to approach a coding problem, there are probably multiple ways to aapproach a software process problem.
instead of talking as if we hate each other, let's articulate our differences with an evident spirit of good will. if neither of us "convert" the other, fine, we shake hands and part as friends agreeing to disagree.
now, if we disagree without starting a crusade against the other guys, we'll have all the energy spent crusading available to hack code. or to gently, and lovingly beg to differ with our ûfellow developers.
I note the use of many pejorative comments in these discussions. emotions run very high, as high as if this matter of Open Source, Free Software, or whatever was a matter of religion.
now, a thousand years ago, we might be disputing the number of angels that can dance upon the end of a pin. i think the issues that have ESR and RMS pulling in different directions are somewhat more important than that, but i have always been bothered by the shrillness of the rhetoric. i'm a fundamentalist Christian, and i know shrillness of rhetoric: i know i don't like it, i know it turns off everyone who isn't a True Believer.
does energy expended in the disputing of these things generate any code? I'd rather see code than a crusade.
Slashdot Mirror
so, let's suppose you learn that slashdot is going to mention your server. what you do then is the following procedure:
1) beg-borrow-steal every spare computer you can lay your hands on.
2) install aux-server stuff on each
3) config them to backfill for your main server
4) weather the slashdot hurricane
5) return everybody's computers with a smile.
obviously, servers see a bursty duty cycle, so why not let the sysop do a quick reshuffling of hardware.
where is civility in political process? none of us are worrying about howto soak the rich, perpetuate the welfare state, or get the government off our backs.
it possible for men of good will to disagree without calling each other evil, parasites, or pointy-haired? indeed, our medium is prone to flamage. and the fear of all of us is that the flower of free software will be crushed by the forces of darkness. true, we must take council of our fears. yet, we mustn't let them dictate to us. we're all smart guys, and we're all opinionated guys, and we all immediately suspect that he who disagrees with us is misinformed or misguided.
we *want* the same thing "what" and some of us disagree on the "how" to get it. so, if some of us follow different paths, we're merely instantiating the distributed, decentralized, free software way. if there are multiple ways to approach a coding problem, there are probably multiple ways to aapproach a software process problem.
instead of talking as if we hate each other, let's articulate our differences with an evident spirit of good will. if neither of us "convert" the other, fine, we shake hands and part as friends agreeing to disagree.
now, if we disagree without starting a crusade against the other guys, we'll have all the energy spent crusading available to hack code. or to gently, and lovingly beg to differ with our ûfellow developers.
gaak, i feel like papa smurf.
now, a thousand years ago, we might be disputing the number of angels that can dance upon the end of a pin. i think the issues that have ESR and RMS pulling in different directions are somewhat more important than that, but i have always been bothered by the shrillness of the rhetoric. i'm a fundamentalist Christian, and i know shrillness of rhetoric: i know i don't like it, i know it turns off everyone who isn't a True Believer.
does energy expended in the disputing of these things generate any code? I'd rather see code than a crusade.