Linux 'Awfully Cathedral-Like' - Java's a Bazaar 297
jg21 writes "LinuxWorld draws attention to a curious use of ESR's The Cathedral and the Bazaar by the Sun Microsystems exec who currently talks about Linux more than he does even about Java. Apparently Sun's President and COO Jonathan Schwartz said at a press briefing last week that Java with its JCP is more like ESR's Bazaar than Linux, which he dismissed as being "awfully cathedral-like" since Linus is the final arbiter (or Great Dictator), and not a committee." But be sure you don't mis-use the word Java in this Bazaar or the Mall Police will totally get you.
I agree (Score:4, Funny)
Re:delegate, and more you'll get (Score:2, Insightful)
Not exactly correct... you cannot draw the conclusion that delegating important stuff to other people necessarily means that they are greater people.
"when you manage to delegate more important stuff, contribution comes from a greater number people."
Which may have merit in making something better, but it might not either. I remember sayins such as "design by committee" and "too many cooks spoil the
Who listens to Sun any more? (Score:3, Informative)
Sun, of course, feels heavily threatened by Linux and is merely spreading FUD in order to cement Sun's (TINY) market share and bolster Sun's (TINY) share price.
I have been an active member of the Linux community since its inception and we have been exorbitantly friendly to new users and developers. Sun, by contrast, makes you sign restrictive participatory agreements and agree to non-Free licences for community-owned code.
Sun is dead. Long live Linux.
Re:Who listens to Sun any more? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Who listens to Sun any more? (Score:3, Insightful)
I've been a software engineer for over 15 years and used lots of technologies, but when it comes to any linux forum I have personally called every dirty name in the book, and I hardly think I or anyone else deserve that.
I can't being to tell you how many times I have been told to "look it up", RTFM, Google-It, or anything
Um... (Score:5, Interesting)
Linux on the other hand, I can muck around in the code myself however I like. I can include other people's patches that Linus *does not* approve, or I can even change it myself (though between you and me, don't expect it to do a damn thing other than crash).
How is that cathedral like?
And how is java superior in any significant way?
Re:Um... (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly. If Linus' version (for whatever reason) became so outdated and unnecessary anyone else could fork it off (from any point) and maintain it however they wanted.
If someone thinks that a panel of people is so much better at making descisions for the future of "Linux" so be it. Enjoy maintaining the kernel. Honestly, Linux has been doing amazingly well with Linus at the wheel and I really can't see it changing anytime soon.
Yeah, there's tiffs here and there about what gets put in and what doesn't but it's his fork and he can maintain it however he wants.
Re:Um... (Score:4, Informative)
More to the point many do, including major distros.
The whole idea that Linus dictates what goes in the kernel is utter bollocks, whereas Sun is infamous for maintaining the "true vision" and "purity" of Java.
Isn't their very argument against open sourcing Java that what happens to Linux would happen to it?
KFG
Re:Um... (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux works without purity because it's not designed to be pure. It's designed to be taken apart and reoutfittied as necessary.
The whole comparison thing is Apples to Oranges.
Re:Um... (Score:5, Informative)
Sun could turn the standard over to an independent committee. They don't want to do that. You can argue the merits (or lack thereof) of their position but that's a different conversation and isn't comparable to Linus' control of the kernel (which is arguably an implementation of the POSIX standard.)
Re:Um... (Score:5, Informative)
Also, the GNU Java runtime is doomed because of Sun patents on technologies in the J2SE specification. Read about the GNU Classpath project and Kaffe and you'll find that although they have made great progress, keeping up in the future is hindered by patent encumbrances. J2SE is not free and cannot be free for this reason.
Sun used to espouse "open" meaning proprietary implementations of an open standard, competing on quality (and presumably, extensions beyond the standard). That's a decent approach, but not viable if the "open" standard really has patents attached that cause clean-room implementations to be subject to patent infringement lawsuits.
Actually they DID, it's called the JCP (Score:5, Insightful)
For the billionth time, Java IS run by a standards body - the JCP. Sun has a vote on future changes to Java, just like many other companies - such as IBM. JSR's are as valid a standard as anything POSIX.
Do you think IBM (or other companies) would have got so on board with Java if the process for changing the language was not open?
Is the proprietary way the only way to "Purity"? (Score:3, Insightful)
By and large, the source for Perl and its libraries is wide open (I believe the "artistic licens
Re:Um... (Score:5, Insightful)
The Linux kernel is extremely fragmented, and the only reason Linus' kernel remain relevant is because he's shown himself to be pragmatic enough about what he'll include that people find it worthwhile trying to sync with him where possible.
How it could be more Bazaar like is beyond me - various strains survive purely based on merit, and features appear or disappear based on what gets popular or what doesn't get any traction. At any point there can be a total chaos of available versions solving any number of different problems.
Linus just happens to keep being that guy that built a name by being the original author, and keep his reputation by getting his version good enough for enough people to keep the "customers" coming. If he starts screwing up, someone else will take all his "business" and he'll end up being ignored. At the same time there keeps being enough niches for tons of other versions, because not everyone has the same goals.
Contrast that to Java, where no matter what happens, Sun is the final arbiter.
Re:Um... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Um... (Score:3, Interesting)
It's more like Linus has a stall in the same bazaar as everyone else. Linus' stall may be very popular, but it is far from the only stall that offers Linux in the bazaar.
Conversely, just because you have a different version of Linux, doesn't mean all other stalls in the bazaar must now carry your version. You compete with all the other stalls. If what you offer is
Re:Um... (Score:3, Informative)
I still don't think it's appropriate to talk about any cathedra
Re:Um... (Score:5, Funny)
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!
I tell you cathedral. Profane activities with holy Linux kernel will be prosecuted.
Re:Um... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Um... (Score:3, Insightful)
They have huge numbers of developers, testers, researchers etc to decide what should go in and how. The colour of the taskbar in Windows wasnt just randomly picked by Bill "hmm, lets make it blue", they would have had researchers and testers etc to decide what it should be. The same goes with every little detail in Windows. Its not based on what some guy think would be best, but typically by what the research shows woul
Re:Um... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Um... (Score:3, Insightful)
The presence of a multitude of competitors building on the same code keeps Linus honest and forces him to get by on his merit rather than on his appointment as Archbisho
Give me a cathedral any day. (Score:5, Interesting)
Comparing Linux, Java, Mozilla and GNOME (Score:5, Insightful)
Java is "bazaar"-like because the JCP provides a mechanism for groups and individuals to create proposals to evolve or extend Java which are ratified by a committe (again of groups and individuals, essentially chosen in a meritocratic manner). This could be compared with Mozilla's team of super-reviewers.
Jonathan's point is that Linux (the kernel) is cathedral-like because decisions about changes to the kernel are made exclusively by Linus Torvalds.
Java has open processes for becoming a member of the change committee (see http://www.jcp.org/en/participation/membership [jcp.org]) and for submitting proposals (see http://www.jcp.org/en/procedures/jcp2#1 [jcp.org]).
"Linux" in the broadest sense (see http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/ColmSmyth/200411
I really find Eric Raymond's seminal CATB article (see http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaa
http://blogs.sun.com/ColmSmyth/ [sun.com]
Re:Comparing Linux, Java, Mozilla and GNOME (Score:5, Interesting)
Linus' decision-making becomes the focus when there is a "tie" (for lack of a better word) between competing visions. And so what if it is? I know many people who run -ac kernels exclusively. And it's still Linux.
Re:Comparing Linux, Java, Mozilla and GNOME (Score:3, Insightful)
What good does it do me or say a company to take time to learn the large Java code base and then to only be able to use it for "research"? With Linux I can submit a patch. That patch is usually reviewed and accepted by a subsystem maintainer, not Linus. If Linus thinks
Re:Comparing Linux, Java, Mozilla and GNOME (Score:5, Insightful)
This is asinine. I know Jonathan was very precise in his language, being careful to circumscribe his 'cathedral' comments to the kernel.org official version of Linux, but there is so much work that's going on in Linux all around those versions, it makes his comment deceptive in view of the larger picture.
How many versions are there of the Linux kernel in use? Thousands, I'm sure. I've personally produced a handful of them (integrating Snare into several Red Hat kernels). How many distinguishable versions of Java are there out there? A few dozen?
Linux is canonically a bazaar, because everyone has the right to produce their own variant for their own needs. The fact that the code is GPL'ed means that the mainline kernel (that mythical 'cathedral' led by Linus Torvalds) can adopt the changes if they are well implemented and suitable for ubiquitization, and that those folks producing the variants can incorporate anything from the Linus-blessed kernel.
Hey, I like Java just fine. I've spent years producing free software on top of it, and I'm duly appreciative, but I don't pretend that Java is anywhere near as much a Bazaar as Linux is. If it were, there are a whole bunch of bugs on the Java Bug Database that would not have lingered for the last seven years, I can assure you.
Re:Um... (Score:2, Interesting)
However, I would still suggest that Linux is very much a Bazaar, but there are other projects which are even more so.
This really is a question of development model, not of Freedom however. And yes, Certainly windows is the ultimate closed-source Cathedral. But this is not about Windows.
Linux is kind of an "open monarchy", instead of an "open democracy" or "Open committee" that some OSS projects use.
On the other hand, I
popery (Score:5, Interesting)
Personally, I don't like the idea that all of Linux depends on Linus. What if he gets hit by a bus (driven by a recently "retired" Microserf)? But the chaos ensuing from a disappearing Linus would resolve quickly, though possibly in a Great Schism with multiple inheriting popes across the Net, like *BSD. Time for a new paradigm to overextend, Jonathan.
Re:popery (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Um... Can't Microsoft fork it (Score:2, Interesting)
Linux? (Score:5, Interesting)
"Linux" as most people understand the term is the 2-5 CDs full of software that makes a PC do interesting things.
And it's about as bazaar as it can be.
Re:Linux? (Score:2)
Different Development strategies seem to fit. (Score:5, Insightful)
Revenge, sweet revenge! (Score:5, Funny)
Cmdr Taco's homepage was just Slashdotted! There is justice in the world!
Re:Revenge, sweet revenge! (Score:2)
At last! Turn about is fair play!
Been writing Java since 1.0 days ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, Schwartz's bias is clear. The Java Community Process which involves committees of experts and interested parties does indeed yield enhancements to the Java API that are nicely featured and well thought out. But getting on those committees in the first place requires surmounting quite a hurdle. And in the end, Sun itself remains every bit as much a "final arbiter" to the core in which any enhancement runs, the virtual machine.
Bullshit (Score:3, Informative)
Anybody can fork the kernel. Most distributions do. Multiple threads of development happening independently versus everything having to go through a single party is what characterises the bazaar as separate from the cathedral, and this means that Linux is the epitome of the bazaar development process.
And in this corner... (Score:5, Funny)
Bazaar... (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't think that the original idea of the "bazaar" development model was "everyone does whatever the hell they want". You need someone at the top of the tree to decide what stays and what goes. The fact that this is a person and not a number of people is just a coincidence of the way that Linux has emerged, and doesn't represent a large divergence from the bazaar model.
In short: Shut up Schwarz.
Re:Bazaar... (Score:5, Informative)
This would not particularly require a single decision making point (individual or comittee), just time and community consensus.
That aside, I don't think the Bazaar was ever meant to apply to the _kernel_ but to the Linux / other OSS system as a whole.
Filesystems would, to my mind be the ideal example:
Cathedral(Windows); which version of OUR proprietary FS would you like?
Bazaar (Linux); which of these basically unrelated systems would you like?
Stop the PRESS! (Score:3, Insightful)
In other news, MS claims use of Linux violates 1m of their patents and has been known in the state of california to cause cancer.
That's not what "bazaar" means (Score:5, Insightful)
The cathedral means developing inside a small circle and releasing only in great intervals. The bazaar means releasing all the time and letting lots of people submit patches. By that definition, the JCP is certainly more cathedral-like than Linux.
(Note that the cathedral/bazaar difference doesn't refer to free vs. non-free; the FSF's early free software was developed in a more of a cathedral model.)
Re:That's not what "bazaar" means (Score:2)
Not necessarily so. Agile development is more akin to an evolutionary movement toward a stable state, as opposed to a clearly defined process. Users/developers play with and provide input/patches about successive versions of the application until the 'right' solution (in the practical, metaphysical, moral, and esthetic planes) jells into some form of stability - where changes then occur more
Attacking the opposition (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Attacking the opposition (Score:3, Insightful)
Jobs doesn't care that much about the server market, and he doesn't see Linux as a threat in either the consumer market (where it's Apple's hardware, not OS X, that makes the big money) or among creative professionals who aren't about to switch from Photoshop CS to the Gimp any time soon.
Being attacke
Re:Attacking the opposition (Score:2)
No that's fear and weakness as well. I'll admit even to attacking MS because I fear that they'll steamroll any love of computing I have. They also suck for real, but I wouldn't attack so harshly if I didn't have to deal with Windows at every turn.
You assumed I was leaving us out?
"Jobs doesn't
Re:Attacking the opposition (Score:2, Funny)
Or how about when Linus attacks FreeBSD and HURD?
Re:Attacking the opposition (Score:2)
Simple. We're better than them! :P
Seriously wrong ... (Score:3, Interesting)
If Java(tm) users don't like the direction Java(tm) is taking... Tough. They're stuck with it.
this is besides the point (Score:4, Interesting)
The Restaurant and The Kitchen (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The Restaurant and The Kitchen (Score:5, Insightful)
But the choice of consumption is the real distinction. Not that you get to roll your own (I only ever do that when I cannot get a package), but that once a particular meal has been delivered, the consumer has the unfettered right to consume it as they see fit, in whatever way they see fit.
Re:The Restaurant and The Kitchen (Score:2)
Perfect!/
New definition:
Open Source Software purists -- people who have a haunting suspicion that someone somewhere could have spit in their salad.
Re:The Restaurant and The Kitchen (Score:2)
We prefer to use open-source with the government because it is takes too long to order and pay for the restaurant food.
This metaphor also allows for all of the variations of using "pre-made" commercial libraries (like using Hamburger Helper) and hiring a chef to cater your party (hiring an open-source consultant to tailor the installation for you).
Very nice.
Re:The Restaurant and The Kitchen (Score:2)
Most of your post is nonsense, and I can't understand why it got modded +5 Interesting.
It's similar with Free Software - you use it if you really like to 'tinker' with everything or are really short on cash. But if you don't like the former and are not limited by latter, you will rather go to a store with proprietary solutions - where your choices are obviously limited, but you're saving time and effort.
With all due respect, screw you. I'm not that fond of tinkering, and I have plenty of cash, but I sur
Re:The Restaurant and The Kitchen (Score:2)
Re:The Restaurant and The Kitchen (Score:2)
Not sure where that came from, except that they have menus in restaurants... and software.
Re:The Restaurant and The Kitchen (Score:2)
I understand that most people in this world would much prefer to have a prepacked piece of software that they don't have to fiddle with. They just want it to work, much like the restraunt analogy that you offered, where the restaurant patron would like to just order their food. This is a very valid analogy, for a completely different situation.
It would be valid if open source software didn't, by and large, come pre-packaged so that it would work out of the box. It is definitely true that some of the kin
Re:The Restaurant and The Kitchen (Score:2)
Re:The Restaurant and The Kitchen (Score:2)
But that's why I think the c/b metaphor is flawed. A restaurant is not an instituion existing for the sole purpose of existence (let's skip the money laundries for New Jersey mafia and alike in this conversation). It's an institution designed to attract
Cathederal? Bazaar? Errm... (Score:2, Funny)
[The Bazaar model]
is based on the assumption that a million men are wiser than one man. How's that again? I missed something.
[The Cathedral model]
is based on the assumption that one man is wiser than a million men. Let's play that over again, too. Who decides?
R3
In reality... (Score:2)
What is it about Cathedrals? (Score:5, Insightful)
at a conference some years ago, cathedrals (which
we know a bit about in Europe) weren't built like
ESR thinks. They were built over the course of
generations, by a sequence of random people, and
if you had the money to put up (say) a side-chapel
for your recently deceased son, you could do so.
In that sense, they are precisely like Linux: a
set of guiding lights, an overall architecture,
and a framework into which anyone with time and
money can put their additions. If you go to one
of the larger, more complex cathedrals in Europe
you'll see they changed massively in plan and
intent over the some hundreds of years they took
to build.
ian
Re:What is it about Cathedrals? (Score:4, Interesting)
I never have mod points when something *good* needs to be modded up.
"igb" is correct; in fact, some cathedrals have never been finished, even though they are quite useful and beautiful! Antonio Gaudi's [semyan.com] La Sagrada Familia Cathedral [greatbuildings.com] in Barcelona is perhaps the perfect example of a fantastic structure that is taking centuries to construct!
ESR should really spend some time understanding the foundations of his metaphors before building his arguments.
Re:What is it about Cathedrals? (Score:3, Interesting)
I believe it's the only catherdral in the UK to feature all such braches of architecture.
Re:What is it about Cathedrals? (Score:2)
The White House incorporated many different architectural styles as well, but it wasn't built over 6 centuries. (Every other window has either a rounded arch or pointed one over it, for example).
Re:What is it about Cathedrals? (Score:4, Insightful)
All of which is completely irrelevant, as ESR was discussing how they're run, not how they were built.
You didn't get it at all... (Score:4, Insightful)
In the same way, you can put additions in Microsoft Windows, or in Sun Java. But, in order to do so, you must be a big corporation, you must pay, and it must be done according to Microsoft's or Sun's specs.
Big difference... (Score:3, Interesting)
Linux is a cathedral only because people find it most effective. Why create conflict, just for the sake of having conflict? Nothing says Linux can't be "wrestled" from Linus' control, just like x.org took xfree, if he drives it in a direction people don't appriciate.
If anything, this tells me that Linux developers very much agree on where Linux is going, unlike KDE/Gnome/Third party WM discussions, dozens of various frameworks and whatnot you see elsewhere in the OSS world.
Kjella
WOW apple vs. oranges at best (Score:2)
With Linux, Anybody is free to grab the core code and do what ever they want. More importantly, there are already several versions. Linus has his version and other major developers have theirs. Some distros even distribute none Linus versions.
So no, Linux really is the bazaar.
Hemos to /. Cmdrtaco.net (Score:2)
Taste your own bitter medicine Taco!
A Camel... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:A Camel... (Score:2)
A bazaar Java may be... (Score:2)
Design by committee (Score:2)
For a project to be successful you need tight leadership and the ability to say no, but still to have a sense of community and take the best of the feedback from them. The intention of Firefox was to follow the tight leadership route while still building a community which seems to have worked well. They
LMAO (Score:2)
Why is eather model considered Bad? (Score:2)
- Neh uh. I am the Bazaar and you are the Catherdral.
What is wrong with the Catherdral Model and what is so cool about the Bazaar Model. They both have there advantages and disavantage.
These terms are actually both wrong to explain both methods and the Bazaar and the Catherdral models are gross generalizations.
Most Bazaars have someone in charge of it who can make the decision on who can open up shop and who cannot. It may be a group of people or just
What Java is (Score:2, Troll)
Whatever the claims about "Community Process", Sun runs Java and Scott McNealy runs Sun when it really comes down to it. I would suggest asking long term Sun folks(the folks that built that company and were there over 15 year ago) what they really think of that means of governance.
Re:What Java is (Score:5, Insightful)
Whatever the claims about "Community Process", Sun runs Java and Scott McNealy runs Sun when it really comes down to it. I would suggest asking long term Sun folks(the folks that built that company and were there over 15 year ago) what they really think of that means of governance.
Say what you will about Java and Sun, but here's how I see things:
I'm much more productive writing Java code than C or C++ code, at least for the kinds of applications I build.
Java is well supported. Most often, how well a language is supported is just as important as how good the language itself is.
Sun has done an excellent job listening to the community and making sure Java continues to grow.
Java is perhaps the only serious competitor to Microsoft's .NET, and in my opinion, if .NET "wins", we all lose.
Suggesting that Scott McNealy has some kind of low level control over Java's growth is ridiculous.
All in all, I would say Java is an excellent technology with a bright future, and to fear it because "OMG OMG, evil dumb stupid Scott McNealy controls Java, OMG OMG, it sux0rz, it's proprietary, run for the hills!" is foolish.
Category mistake (Score:5, Insightful)
Java is developed the way it is because it works, after a fashion.
Now which method is better is impossinle to tell since Java and Linux do very different things.
If they were both operating systems, you might compare with a bunch of benchmarks, like number of computers installed with it, market share, job vacancies administrating it, whatever, and draw some conclusions. But they're not, so you can't.
This is a bit like saying my way of making ice cream is better than your way of making sports cars.
Perhaps Schwarz should put out the new open source Solaris' with his preferred bazaar-like development model and show Linus and the rest of us how it's done.
Misapprehension (Score:3, Interesting)
To analogize it to the proverbial bazaar, it's like noticing that each individual shop is run with an iron fist by its owner, and then claiming that the whole bazaar is a cathedral because each owner doesn't let his shop be run by any random Joe who comes along.
Yes, Linus manages his shop (project) with an iron fist, but anyone can take the kernel and set up their own shop (project) next door. That's still following the bazaar model.
Being both familiar with Linux and Java, let me propose a different analogy: Linux is like being caressed by milky-skinned maidens, and Java is like being kicked in the nuts by a Visigoth.
It all comes down to community involvement (Score:5, Insightful)
It all comes down to community involvement. And both Linux and Java communities do a very good job at that.
Btw...
Have you ever wondered what would have happened if a more organizationally-minded person ran the kernel development?
Linus is very authoritative, and has yet to form an official public community/legal entity that develops and protects the kernel in the 10 year+ that he has been doing it.
What happens if he gets hit by a bus?
Heck what happens today when large factions of kernel developers disagree with him? ( Kernel debugger )
I am not saying Linus is doing a bad job; but couldn't the Linux kernel as an organization be a lot further than it is today?
Re:It all comes down to community involvement (Score:3, Informative)
What happens if he gets hit by a bus?
Then one of the other major kernel developers will take it over. This has in fact already happened (control being turned over, not Linus getting hit by a bus).
Heck what happens today when large factions of kernel developers disagree with him? ( Kernel debugger )
If a large fraction of the kernel developers have a fundamental disagreement with Linus, then they'll fork the kernel and maintain their own. This in fact happens fairly regularly, as with the -mm kernels i
Re:It all comes down to community involvement (Score:3, Informative)
Like OSDL? It doesn't get much more official than that.
What happens if he gets hit by a bus?
The succession has been arranged, but it's based on people, not organizations, since the Linux community is based on personal respect, not respect for an organization.
Re:It all comes down to community involvement (Score:4, Insightful)
What happens today when large factions of kernel developers disagree with Linus is that they share their patches with each other. The offical development series (-mm), where most debugging gets done, has included kgdb for ages. Especially with things that aren't important to end users, there's no need to convince Linus in order to have something in common use.
The thing that really makes Linux development work is that it's not done by committee, and it's not really done with a single authority. Everybody who's working on it really does have their own version, and they're just close enough together that they can trade their work back and forth. In fact, the point of the new development process (i.e., trying not to fork 2.7) is to have all of the trees with current development stay close enough that stuff is shared throughout, rather than splitting into 2.6 and 2.8 regions with slow transit between them.
I can't think of any project which is run as effectively as Linux in terms of getting changes from concept to patch to testing to official while simultaneously keeping out things which are not ready for general use and making them available to people who want them anyway. For example, the process of making Linux suitable for audio editting (which requires some processes to have predictably low latency) is still in progress, because the current versions mess up performance on other systems, have maintainability issues, etc. But people who want to actually do audio editting with Linux just use a tree that has the current version of these changes, rather than Linus's kernel. As the changes get reworked to be suitable for general inclusion, the patches get smaller, and the mainline will eventually have the necessary characteristics.
I think I have had enough (Score:3, Insightful)
He is such a jack-off it makes me think that he is an industry sleeper - someone sent to destroy all credibility of Sun.
M$ has thier own monkey boy, a semi-self-styled nut who says anything he wants, and M$ quizzically apologises for him, and does that half eye roll, well he is nuttier than squirrel shit look and hopefully get away with it.
What the fuck are they trying to prove, Linux is an OS, Java is a devleopment platform, what is the point all this rhetorical FUD? Does it make sense man?
I think not. Now to compound matters the sub blurb on this book is:
Musings of open source blah blah by an accidental revolutionary.
WTF? WHO-TF more like... Also, he is a gun nut. Just what we need. ITS GNU NOT GUN you nozz.
http://www.catb.org/~esr/guns/.
Did this make sense to anybody else? Is this Sun's take of M$ OS costs more? Is it just my sugar deprived brain thinking this is all too wierd?
Story Update: ESR Responds to Schwartz (Score:4, Informative)
ESR's analogy was all screwed up... (Score:4, Interesting)
Eric really needs to take a step or two back and ask if he really said what he thought he said.
Talking out of both sides of their mouth (Score:3, Interesting)
Which is it, guys? You can't have it both ways.
Re:Can we have (Score:2)
Cathedral and Bazaar [catb.org]
Re:Can we have (Score:2, Informative)
Corp-SW is a cathedral; big, complex, rigid, takes AGES to make, intrinsically linked to a strict hierarchical power structure. Nominally direction and decision making comes from the top.
OSS is a bazaar; big, complex, but a collection of LOADS of different things, each able to do its thing its way. Nominally the whole system supports redundant/competing sections, anyone can stake themselves out a chunk and hawk their wares.
The original article, as I recall, goes off on one abo
Re:Can we have (Score:2)
A cathedral is a big building made out of rock. It can be made into a library. In a cathedral, you might see Indiana Jones break open the floor and crawl around in the crypts. Watch out for the rats down there.
So you see, Java is more like bazaar, and Linux is more like a cathedral.
Glad I could help.
Re:Can we have (Score:5, Insightful)
Its amazing how someone can take a great concept and paraphrase it to complete bullshit.
ESR's distinction has nothing to do with closed or open, good or evil, or any moral judgement you ascribe to it.
The Cathedral is a small group working in isolation to a common and predefined goal. "In isolation" meaning not involving collaborators outside the group during development. ESR himself says "It's fairly clear that one cannot code from the ground up in bazaar style. One can test, debug and improve in bazaar style, but it would be very hard to originate a project in bazaar mode. Linus didn't try it. I didn't either." Open source projects general start in Cathedral style.
The Bazaar has everything open for collaboration from anyone during development. Some small group chooses and manages what does and doesn't go into the final "product", but there are only loose and informal goals. The product gets pushing into the shape of whatever anyone and everyone want it to be for them.
You can't modify Linux to do what you want. You can take the Linux source and make a derivation that does what you want, but its not the Linux that the rest of the world uses. Its not product development. Its not the Bazaar. The Bazaar is about contributing to a product, not forking it. The Bazaar is managed, it just doesn't look that way. The source tree isn't open for just anyone to modify, only to read, and to suggest modifications.
Java and Linux present an interesting case to which to apply TCATB.
Java uses a Cathedral style -- development on a revision is performed in isolation by a small group working to specified goals, then the result is released (with source code, but maybe not under your favourite license). But the determination of Java's goals uses the Bazaar style -- everyone gets to make their suggestion and have their say. Depending on community support (either in terms of being vocal or by contributing reference code or technically beneficial suggestions) the desired features may or may not be implemented during the next Cathedral phase.
Linux on the other hand uses Bazaar development. Anyone can hack on the code and contribute changes. But near the top there are a small group who are managing what changes do or do not make it into the official kernel, and ultimately Linus makes the final choice. So assuming that Linus and the patch managers have their own predetermined goals for Linux, the patches they admit to the official kernel tree are more typical of a Cathedral model, in that they are committed by a small group working towards a common and predetermined goal. Of course the argument can be made that Linus and co. don't have specific goals. I believe the truth is somewhere in between -- the goals of the patch managers change from time to time, but are (in the short term) generally predefined.
Re:Cathedral? Bizarre? Who cares? (Score:4, Informative)
I haven't written much either, but then I don't describe myself as "one of the senior technical cadre that makes the Internet work" [prospect.org]
Re:/.taco (Score:2)
Never ceases to amaze me how many people can't spell
Re:/.taco (Score:2)
Re:Yey (Score:5, Insightful)
Sun is watching it's market share of Unix spiral downwards. Sun's solution to this problem isn't to innovate but to go after the competition.
It's the classic bare assed emperor...
But is it wrong? (Score:2, Insightful)
Completely disregarding Sun in the discussion, is the point still valid?
Re:Yey (Score:3, Insightful)
That's rather unfair. Of course they're going after the competition, as any smart marketing organisation always will. But accusing the people who have contributed so significantly to the state of IT today, through Java, Star/OpenOffice and of course Solaris, of not being innovative is just asinine.