Of course we didn't, have you not heard? The open source and slashdot comunity is stuffed full of us loving trusting people who never expect a bad, self interest motivated move from a large corporation like sun. After all they could never have got big in the market being nasty. Could they?
I know lots of people will flame me for saying this, but a man needs to say what he feels needs to be said. Sun is more than capable of acting just like a corporate spoilt brat as Microsoft is. The last few years has seen Sun pushing the hardsell on the computer industry about the benefits of java by it liberateing us from MS control, however unlikely a proposition this looks today. The problem here is that when salvation from MS finaly comes do we want the replacement to be just as bad.
I'm having flash backs to "Animal Farm" here (not that one you perverts! the G.Orwell book), it's a really gnarly political satire look at the rusian revolution and how it basicly changed nothing in the long term.
Personaly I feel the overall aims of cosource are a good one, I'm total advocate of open source and I'm also a total advocate of me having stack loads of cash. Exactly how the two can be made to work together is a different matter but I'm working on my own ideas.
The writer (or the people the writer is quoteing, it's not all that clear) claims "Without some system of monetary incentives, crucial gaps in the open source landscape -- such as applications and user documentation -- would never get filled.", this is not enirely true. The various documentation projects on linux may not be a shining example but a quick look at Apache will show you how it can be done. Not only do the programmers contribute documentation but many of the supporters who are not programmers feel that this is the way they can contribute.
After looking at the cosource website I get the feeling that it's more the article writers objections to open source rather than those of cosource that is showing through
The idea behind this seems to be to find one or more people in group 'A' who need something, then find one or more programmers in group 'B' who feel like writeing it and get 'A' to give 'B' some cash. Good plan in the long run, i'll be watching this site carefully in the future.
The biggest problem with this is the commercial notion of reward, I do things for free that would cause me to laugh if anyone offered me less than several thousand to do. An example of this from the CoSource site is " Request: 3-D modeller with cartoon mode, First, I want an open source 3-D modeller with skeletal animation for X (or crossplatform GUI lib). This may or may not already exist, and building on an existing modeller to add skeletal animation etc is of course OK. But a cartoon rendering mode should be added [snip]" and the grand sum offered for this? $200, I guess the point is that if enough people offerd $200 then the project would get financed. However I'm already working with some other people on a project along these lines, I would not however want to get involved with anything like this unless the cash amount was really significant.
Can any one tell us what the licence that the original code was released under? From the text it sounds more like a direct copyright violation than a license issue
Most open source licenese don't seem to prohibit repackageing and sale but changeing a copyright notice to say it's your own is breaking the law in anyones book. Any additional information would be most apreciated, I havea feeling that their is more to this than meets the eye
It should also be rememberd that this may not be sun's fault, for all we know some rogue employe grabed some source code of the net and told the boss he wrote it to avoid getting fired, I've come accross stories like that before, I guess however that sun would still have a degree of responsability for not checking
I have been hosting www.exaflop.org with Alabanza for several years and I've generaly found them to be pretty good. When we first signed up with them they were far nicer, it was a small outfit and they would bend over backwards to make us happy. These days they are huge and we have had a couple of troubles with them. We asked recently for a couple of new Apache modules to be installed, primarily mod_expires and we were told it just wasn't possible.
Can anybody tell me why mod_expires isn't compiled in by default, it seems like a pretty fundamental peice of functionality to me.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course we didn't, have you not heard? The open source and slashdot comunity is stuffed full of us loving trusting people who never expect a bad, self interest motivated move from a large corporation like sun. After all they could never have got big in the market being nasty. Could they?
I know lots of people will flame me for saying this, but a man needs to say what he feels needs to be said. Sun is more than capable of acting just like a corporate spoilt brat as Microsoft is. The last few years has seen Sun pushing the hardsell on the computer industry about the benefits of java by it liberateing us from MS control, however unlikely a proposition this looks today. The problem here is that when salvation from MS finaly comes do we want the replacement to be just as bad.
I'm having flash backs to "Animal Farm" here (not that one you perverts! the G.Orwell book), it's a really gnarly political satire look at the rusian revolution and how it basicly changed nothing in the long term.
Vive le revolution!
Personaly I feel the overall aims of cosource are a good one, I'm total advocate of open source and I'm also a total advocate of me having stack loads of cash. Exactly how the two can be made to work together is a different matter but I'm working on my own ideas.
The writer (or the people the writer is quoteing, it's not all that clear) claims "Without some system of monetary incentives, crucial gaps in the open source landscape -- such as applications and user documentation -- would never get filled.", this is not enirely true. The various documentation projects on linux may not be a shining example but a quick look at Apache will show you how it can be done. Not only do the programmers contribute documentation but many of the supporters who are not programmers feel that this is the way they can contribute.
After looking at the cosource website I get the feeling that it's more the article writers objections to open source rather than those of cosource that is showing through
The idea behind this seems to be to find one or more people in group 'A' who need something, then find one or more programmers in group 'B' who feel like writeing it and get 'A' to give 'B' some cash. Good plan in the long run, i'll be watching this site carefully in the future.The biggest problem with this is the commercial notion of reward, I do things for free that would cause me to laugh if anyone offered me less than several thousand to do. An example of this from the CoSource site is " Request: 3-D modeller with cartoon mode, First, I want an open source 3-D modeller with skeletal animation for X (or crossplatform GUI lib). This may or may not already exist, and building on an existing modeller to add skeletal animation etc is of course OK. But a cartoon rendering mode should be added [snip]" and the grand sum offered for this? $200, I guess the point is that if enough people offerd $200 then the project would get financed. However I'm already working with some other people on a project along these lines, I would not however want to get involved with anything like this unless the cash amount was really significant.
Can any one tell us what the licence that the original code was released under? From the text it sounds more like a direct copyright violation than a license issue
Most open source licenese don't seem to prohibit repackageing and sale but changeing a copyright notice to say it's your own is breaking the law in anyones book. Any additional information would be most apreciated, I havea feeling that their is more to this than meets the eye
It should also be rememberd that this may not be sun's fault, for all we know some rogue employe grabed some source code of the net and told the boss he wrote it to avoid getting fired, I've come accross stories like that before, I guess however that sun would still have a degree of responsability for not checking
And I thought there were no cool jobs in the public sector anymore!
I have been hosting www.exaflop.org with Alabanza for several years and I've generaly found them to be pretty good. When we first signed up with them they were far nicer, it was a small outfit and they would bend over backwards to make us happy. These days they are huge and we have had a couple of troubles with them. We asked recently for a couple of new Apache modules to be installed, primarily mod_expires and we were told it just wasn't possible.
Can anybody tell me why mod_expires isn't compiled in by default, it seems like a pretty fundamental peice of functionality to me.