The point that Jaron makes about the importance of encapsulation when he gets into the ecological soup metaphor was what stuck with me the most and I think its important. When you think about it, isn't organization the thing that makes or breaks all models of software development? Sure Linus Torvalds can't get people to do things but OTOH he doesn't have to include their code either. He also has a group of trusted subordinates to help him wade through the latest code and to help set the priorities of the project right? Gee, that sounds like elements of a closed-source dev project doesn't it with a "gatekeeper" present to moderate the flow of the project (and possibly the information...)? The characterization is naive, I know, and on the greatest abstraction level possible but that just means the differences are all in the implementation, right? So the Linux project has encapsulated the world's open source programmers and the project's source code together into a big box where information and ideas can flow as freely as the beer does. But what goes out into the world in the final product is highly regulated by the core project members, so it is there that the openness gives way to the closed. A project by Microsoft on the other hand is encapsulated in a much more finely grained fashion with much more restrictive regulation of the flow of information. To me it sounds like these two projects have started from the same starting point but have merely diverged in the organization (implementation).
I think this is a point from TFA that is missed by the majority of the posts. Too bad, I think its pretty important.
Slashdot Mirror
The point that Jaron makes about the importance of encapsulation when he gets into the ecological soup metaphor was what stuck with me the most and I think its important. When you think about it, isn't organization the thing that makes or breaks all models of software development? Sure Linus Torvalds can't get people to do things but OTOH he doesn't have to include their code either. He also has a group of trusted subordinates to help him wade through the latest code and to help set the priorities of the project right? Gee, that sounds like elements of a closed-source dev project doesn't it with a "gatekeeper" present to moderate the flow of the project (and possibly the information...)? The characterization is naive, I know, and on the greatest abstraction level possible but that just means the differences are all in the implementation, right? So the Linux project has encapsulated the world's open source programmers and the project's source code together into a big box where information and ideas can flow as freely as the beer does. But what goes out into the world in the final product is highly regulated by the core project members, so it is there that the openness gives way to the closed. A project by Microsoft on the other hand is encapsulated in a much more finely grained fashion with much more restrictive regulation of the flow of information. To me it sounds like these two projects have started from the same starting point but have merely diverged in the organization (implementation). I think this is a point from TFA that is missed by the majority of the posts. Too bad, I think its pretty important.