Re: gEDA-user: gEDA DLL hell

[Karel Kulhavy <clock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Oct 28, 2005 at 05:20:36PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> 
> > > I think you have not understund how an open source project works.
> > 
> > Open source project means that the sources are open.
> 
> "The basic idea behind open source is very simple: When programmers
>  can read, redistribute, and modify the source code for a piece of
>  software, the software evolves. PEOPLE IMPROVE IT, PEOPLE ADAPT IT,
>  PEOPLE FIX BUGS. And this can happen at a speed that, if one is used
>  to the slow pace of conventional software development, seems
>  astonishing." (emphasis mine) [http://www.opensource.org]
> 
> Open source is about more than just software licenses.  You're
> confusing it with Free Software, which *is* just about software
> licenses.
> 
> > Open source doesn't have anything to do how the sources are generated.
> 
> Oh, yes it does.  The license is specifically chosen to affect the way
> the sources are generated - with rapid evolution being the end goal.
> Read http://www.opensource.org/
> 
> Rapid evolution doesn't happen if everyone just sits back and
> complains about what isn't done.
> 
> Note - *all* types of participation help.  In your case, "hey, I tried
> this and it broke" *does* help.  But that doesn't entitle you to
> *demand* we change things.
> 
> > It only describes the licensing of the sources.
> 
> Licensing is a means, not an end.
> 
> > For example Linux kernel is
> 
> ... free software (GPL), which is ...
> 
> > developed partially by paid developers, who don't write it in spare
> > time for fun, but in their working time for living. This is an
> > counterexample on what you are saying proving that what you are
> > saying is not true.
> 
> If you want to hire someone to develop gEDA on your behalf, go ahead.
> I know PCB gets donations from a few sources, and as far as I'm
> concerned, their requests have higher priority than others (all else
> being equal).
> 
> When I, as a Red Hat employee, work on GCC, I'm doing it because
> there's someone somewhere who's paying me to do it for them (either RH
> or one of their customers).  Development time is neither cheap nor
> abundant.  If you want something done, you have basically three
> choices:
> 
> 1. Do it yourself.
> 2. Wait for someone else to do it.
> 3. Pay for it.
> 
> You don't seem to be satisfied with #2, nor willing to #3.  That
> leaves #1.

Combined together it gives the Ronja procedure:
1. Do it yourself
2. Wait for someone else to pay for it.

;-)

CL<