On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 11:41:31 +0100 "M. Fioretti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I couldn't care less which one is more important. Why change the > subject? The problem is how naive it is to assume that: > > a) "you could fix the source yourself" is still a valid and polite > answer to give to free desktops newcomers. It has never been a polite answer. Valid, it's another matter. I'd answer: "Resources are missing. Please, find them." or "That feature is not on the roadmap. Convince me to change it." Resources (and engineering decisions) are valid limits both for proprietary and open source project, corporations and non profit associations. > b) only those who *can* contribute to a FOSS project have the right to > complain about it or ask others for help. No, everybody can do criticism or ask for help and they should be answered with politeness if they have asked with politeness and logic. Indeed, I started this thread just to ask the rectification of two sentences in Brown's article, which I'm sure they're wrong. The fact I consider the article wrong also for the logic is not related to the request of rectification or the right to do criticism. I asked a rectification because he wrote wrong or, better, not-so-correct statements (I've quoted them in my initial mail) and not because he did criticism. > > It's what I did with the Italian spellchecker. I need it and there's > > none, so I did it. > > Precisely my point. You *had* the skills and, above all, the spare > time to do it (both what you did yourself and what you coordinated/ > stimulated). Sincere thanks, absolutely, but it doesn't mean that > everybody else who didn't was scratching his or her belly. Or, to > stick to the original point, it doesn't prove at all that the FOSS > development model can ever scale for desktop applications, or improve > them as the userbase grows, as it is still naively assumed by many > (not me, Andrew or you). I agree. There's is no evidence the open source model can scale for desktop applications. At the same time, there's no evidence it cannot. We're talking about assumptions (clues) and not evidences. I have said it since the beginning and repeated it again and again... :) However, I suspect I'm misunderstanding the first sentence of your quoted paragraph. I know users have their own life to live and have other things to do rather than thinking how a software works or it is developed, but from your words it seems FOSS projects have the *duty* to satisfy whatever need of whatever user. If I'm wrong, please correct me. IMO, FOSS projects have not such a duty. They *can* grow and satisfy the needs of a niche, of a users' category or of a large market share. However, there's no need to dominate the market. It suffices to have alternatives and to make a choice possible. Regards, Gianluca -- Il futuro, duro come non lo avreste mai immaginato: http://www.internetbookshop.it/ser/serdsp.asp?shop=1&c=KEE4YJPPYO3IO Volete scoprire cosa spinge una persona a divenire scrittore? "Sturm und Drang": http://www.lulu.com/content/116405 Vi domandate come sarà il futuro dell'Unione Europea tra vent'anni? "La fine del gioco": http://www.lulu.com/content/95804 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
