Vihan Pandey vihanpandey@[EMAIL-PROTECTED]
Fri Jan 19 13:09:44 IST 2007

> my thesis is this: just because source is released under some
> license, that does not make a project a foss project. Or rather a
> true foss project. The criterion for a true foss project is *not* the
> license chosen or the fact that the source is available, *but* the
> development model followed. The closer it is to the bazaar model of
> development, the better chance it has of surviving. We tend to lose
> sight of this very often. And why is this important?
> If you look at wikipedia, around 850 people have contributed 50% of
> the english content. The rest is contributed by tens of thousands of
> people. And a lot of this contribution is one-off contribution. And
> it is these one-offs or minor contributions that make up half of
> wikipedia. A developmental environment that efficiently harvests
> these 'minor' contributions is a healthy 'fossy' environment. Which
> is why I dont like the environment provided by mono or mysql where a
> patch will not be accepted unless copyright is assigned.
> Yes, in most projects, the core team with commit rights, the main
> contributors are few. Sometimes just one person. But the community
> around the project is important. Does sun have the culture to build
> such a community? Will some outsider be allowed into the inner circle
> to decide directions. Are decsions made by a meritocracy - or by the
> company heirarchy. These are the important things.


However i'd like to add that yes its a step in the right direction, and i
hope they take more of the same. The ``elitism" of not accepting commits
without surrendering copyrite never benefits anyone and is a self defeating
policy i hope Sun does not(never does) implement it.


- vihan

More information about the Linuxers mailing list