Comments on: Torvalds looking for new Linux home

Linus Torvalds wants replacement for BitKeeper system that houses and manages global programming effort. Development could slow as result.

Torvalds is in error, here.

The ethical thing to do is to stay with BitKeeper until the Linux community has an open-source initiative to competely replace the impetus of BitKeeper in line with their own needs and experience with updating, revising and distributing open-source code.

Torvalds is demonstrating that the open source movement strays towards a 're-write and ignore copyright movement'. Of course, there were many who accused Torvalds of doing just that in the originial Linux implementation.

Of course the Linux crowd can always acuse PutDown of not-knowing what he is talking about, cause he ain't Linux. But I think the facts of this matter speak for themselves. Why did Torvalds allow a non-open source program such high profile in the Linux heirarchy?

Torvalds is in error, here.

The ethical thing to do is to stay with BitKeeper until the Linux community has an open-source initiative to competely replace the impetus of BitKeeper in line with their own needs and experience with updating, revising and distributing open-source code.

Torvalds is demonstrating that the open source movement strays towards a 're-write and ignore copyright movement'. Of course, there were many who accused Torvalds of doing just that in the originial Linux implementation.

Of course the Linux crowd can always acuse PutDown of not-knowing what he is talking about, cause he ain't Linux. But I think the facts of this matter speak for themselves. Why did Torvalds allow a non-open source program such high profile in the Linux heirarchy?

The Story of the Hare and the Tortoise!

With the move to revert to a less automated system based on e-mailing and threatening to slow the pace of Linux development; perhaps, "economy" wise... with IBM still reluctant to release OS/2 Warp into the open-source community this can see OS/2 gaining ground on both Windows and Linux based on OS/2 being able to take advantage of the availability of the "Eclipse" Architecture presently under development for applications delivery. Lest we forget the story of the "hare" and the "tortoise"!

[aabcdefghij987654321]

Pipe dream

Better check what you're smoking. OS/2 won't be made "open source" because (among other reasons) part of the source is still the property of Microsoft who wrote it in the first place. IBM has the rights to market and use that software but not necessarily the right to release it to the world as open source.

OS/2 is also so far off of the mainstream map these days that it's hard to conceive of a way for it to return to prominence.

The Story of the Hare and the Tortoise!

With the move to revert to a less automated system based on e-mailing and threatening to slow the pace of Linux development; perhaps, "economy" wise... with IBM still reluctant to release OS/2 Warp into the open-source community this can see OS/2 gaining ground on both Windows and Linux based on OS/2 being able to take advantage of the availability of the "Eclipse" Architecture presently under development for applications delivery. Lest we forget the story of the "hare" and the "tortoise"!

[aabcdefghij987654321]

Pipe dream

Better check what you're smoking. OS/2 won't be made "open source" because (among other reasons) part of the source is still the property of Microsoft who wrote it in the first place. IBM has the rights to market and use that software but not necessarily the right to release it to the world as open source.

OS/2 is also so far off of the mainstream map these days that it's hard to conceive of a way for it to return to prominence.

[qazwiz]

Richard Stallman vindicated by greed

The article has all the points covered why free demos aren't the way to go for the Open Source community.

Free versions that are proprietary can be(and in this case are being) pulled

When someone developed an open source item that works with the proprietary program the $$$$owner admits being mad at the FREEowner

Result: the pulling of the free version

The only "reduction" in productivity should be immediate redirecting of efforts to make an acceptable OPEN SOURCE alternative.

Wish lists should be immediately created and quickly categorized and prioritized. The Open Source Community needs to rally around this immediately.

The $56 million alternative that was mentioned, divided among tens of thousands of developers(also mentioned) would amount to each buying a Microsoft product (estimate range $200 - $600 per person)

THIS IS WHAT OPEN SOURCE IS TRYING TO AVOID

And this can happen ANYTIME one starts to depend on proprietary software no matter what the cost.

The only possible exception would be a low cost item that comes with "lifetime free updates" and even this has the problem that buying a Gizmo version 5.7 might never be upgraded but instead the same company could start selling Gazmo 2.0 with all Gizmo functions and more circumventing any update commitment for the former product..... SO...

Open Source is Open Source and Proprietary is Proprietary and never the twain shall meet!

[qazwiz]

Richard Stallman vindicated by greed

The article has all the points covered why free demos aren't the way to go for the Open Source community.

Free versions that are proprietary can be(and in this case are being) pulled

When someone developed an open source item that works with the proprietary program the $$$$owner admits being mad at the FREEowner

Result: the pulling of the free version

The only "reduction" in productivity should be immediate redirecting of efforts to make an acceptable OPEN SOURCE alternative.

Wish lists should be immediately created and quickly categorized and prioritized. The Open Source Community needs to rally around this immediately.

The $56 million alternative that was mentioned, divided among tens of thousands of developers(also mentioned) would amount to each buying a Microsoft product (estimate range $200 - $600 per person)

THIS IS WHAT OPEN SOURCE IS TRYING TO AVOID

And this can happen ANYTIME one starts to depend on proprietary software no matter what the cost.

The only possible exception would be a low cost item that comes with "lifetime free updates" and even this has the problem that buying a Gizmo version 5.7 might never be upgraded but instead the same company could start selling Gazmo 2.0 with all Gizmo functions and more circumventing any update commitment for the former product..... SO...

Open Source is Open Source and Proprietary is Proprietary and never the twain shall meet!