On 4/10/2013 12:15 AM, John Gilmore wrote:
I think that guarantees are less important than would be an
established process for fixing, promptly, something that proves to be
broken.
There are a very few people whose I "guarantee this app will work" I
would give great weight to, without perhaps believing it quite
literally. There are no organizations in this category. An
organizational commitment to fix what is broken may, however, be
believable.
That said, I suspect that such a scheme would not be economically
viable for cheap apps. What may be possible is a two-level release
scheme. An app could perhaps be released first as a draft, 'for
testing' one and only later and conditionally upon the community's
experience with it as a definitive, 'for use' one.
In the end of the day it does come down to trust. Why trust a vendor of
a mainframe tool and not an open source product
when the open source product may have been scrutinised by thousands of
well credentialed experts.
Didn't products like CICS, VTAM get a massive contribution from
customers back in the day before OCO.
Open source software runs our daily lives. From our browsers, our
phones, modems/routers, the servers running this list.
John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
