[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: gEDA-user: Hm...not much improvement

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, al davis wrote:
On Wednesday 20 September 2006 22:42, Stuart Brorson wrote: 
 I suspect user error, and think he should do some more
reading and investigating before posting bleats to geda-user.


Even if it is user error, it deserves attention.  Almost 100% of the bug
reports for gnucap since its beginning have involved some kind of user
error.  Still, most of the bugs are real.  The error handling portion
is tested less than the mainline part, yet this is the most important
part for a beginner.


I agree that users often point out bugs, and the bugs deserve
attention.  Therefore, user bug reports are welcome and useful.

However, Arthur didn't so much post a bug report as he posted a "geda
stinks" whine.  His original message had no actionable details -- no
specific bugs -- and just trashed the project instead.   His second
message finally made the point that his installation was missing the
desktop icon.  That problem is laughable for two reasons:  1.  It's
not the fault of the gEDA project (it's the fault of the RPM
packager as you pointed out first), and 2.  It's completely trivial.
Arthur could have been a good sport and submitted a five line patch to
fix the icon issue, but instead he chose to post a rant.

My reponse to folks who trash the project is to remind them that gEDA is
a free software project.  As such, it makes more demands upon the user
than shrink-wrapped software.  At a minimum, the user needs to be
clueful enough to work around whatever small warts the software has.
Beyond that, if a complainer is unhappy about the way the software
behaves, he should do one of the following:

  *  Fix the misfeature himself.  This is made possible by the open
     source nature of the programs.
  *  Ask politely on the dev list for a bugfix.  The developers create
     features at user request all the time.  But if the asker is not
     polite, he's a fool to think people will take action on his
     request.
  *  Pay a hacker to implement his feature.  This is the acid test:
     if the complainer really cares about getting his feature/fixing
     his bug, he will put his money where his mouth is.  Otherwise,
     he's just angling for a freebie.
  *  Find some other software to solve his problem.

Open-source software is not manna from heaven -- it doesn't just
appear on the net for the casual fool to download and use.  Rather,
there are developers behind it who work hard to create the programs,
and then give away their work for free.  Accordingly, there is an
implicit contract between developer and user: The developer
distributes his creation for all to use, and the user  *participates*
in the creative process -- either passively by using and enjoying the
software, or actively by submitting bug reports, patches,
participating in the community, etc.

Whiners like Arthur are not part of any creative
process, however.  They are *destructive* because they simply post
negative rants -- without making any positive contribution.  Personally,
I think Arthur and his ilk should be encouraged to use other software
since they contribute nothing to the project, and they pose the danger
that they'll spread FUD and negative publicity about any project they
come into contact with.

Finally, I'll make some pseudo-economic points about the difference
between open-source software and commercial, shrink-wrapped software:
The relationship of developer to user, and the way costs (monetary and
non-monetary) are distributed:

  * In a good open-source project (like gEDA), there is a *community*
    of developers and users who all support each other to one degree
    or another.  Most users are also developers, whether of
    software, documentation, footprints, advice, whatever.  Everybody
    shares their work for the betterment of the community, at zero
    monetary cost.  Yes, there  are a lot of freeloaders in this
    scheme, but since the marginal cost of carrying freeloaders is
    zero, nobody cares.

    However, negative, carping non-contributors are worse than
    freeloaders.  IMO they don't belong in this
    scheme since they *do* impose a cost:  they give the developers
    aggro, upset community relations (at least mine), and pose the
    danger that they'll badmouth the software outside the community.

  * With shrink-wrapped software, the developers are totally separate
    from the users.  There is no community, with delicate community
    relations to balance and maintain.  Users pay real money to get
    the software.  There are no free riders since you have to pay to
    play.  Therefore the developers are bound to listen to
    user complaints --  no matter how uninformed or destructive.

    This is the place where Arthur and his ilk should get their
    software, IMO.

I think it's time for me to drop this thread since I've lingered on
my philosophical points a little too long. . . . .   :-)

Stuart


_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user