On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 02:10:24PM +0100, Will Scheidegger wrote: > > On 01.12.2005, at 12:37, John Mettraux wrote: > > >Jboss is doing fine. I was emitting an opinion about 'other' open > >source > >projects. > > I agree with most of what you said and I also agree with Boris not > wanting to work for free - I don't want to work for free either. But > with JBoss you've probably picked the one open source project with the > worst reputation out there (see > http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/64762 for instance). It's > exactly the "JBoss-Style" that I would hate to see Magnolia slip into.
Hi Will, I intentionally chose the 'JBoss case' because of its controversiality. They definitely 'play hard' and are not afraid to cross the line. Knowing the people behind Magnolia, I doubt the possibility of a JBoss shift. As linux predated mostly commercial unixes instead of windows, there is a probability that professional open source may predate 'amateur' open source instead of closed source software. (yes, there is a war between OS projects) > Open source projects work best, if nobody expects anyone to do > anything. Users shouldn't expect features from developers and > developers shouldn't be dependent on a revenue out of the effort they > put into their project. What can those developers do when there is no food left in the fridge ? There are currently no charities for open source developers. A project has to be very good or has to die (or be maintained by someone with enough time and money (from other sources)). I still believe that 'secondary features' should never get developed without a sponsor. By 'secondary feature', I mean a feature that has not been put in the 'next step' circle of the project roadmap by the project leader. Changing the roadmap of a project should involve a cost. I have to say that I agree with your statement > Open source projects work best, if ... but this ideal is... well an ideal, but it has been spotted in the wild... (perhaps older examples of open source projects, but perhaps not in the Java OS sub-world). > The only thing that one should come to expect > in an open source project is that code and documentation should keep > pace with each other and that if someone wants to contribute he/she > should be able to do so easily. Otherwise the project will never > attract new developers. This is so true. An undocumented feature is a non-existent feature. On the other hand, I discussed the other day with someone at the core of the Apache Cocoon project and he mentioned the fact that their documentation was really lagging, but that the quality of their 'user base' was high enough to manage undocumented, yet powerful, features. Well, there is the 'Apache' label in front of this project name... Magnolia has no Apache/JBoss[/Codehaus] label. I should stop writing for now, I feel I opened a lot of questions, and I'm no oracle, no clear vision on the future... Best regards, -- john.mettraux @ openwfe.org -///- http://www.openwfe.org ---------------------------------------------------------------- for list details see http://www.magnolia.info/en/magnolia/developer.html ----------------------------------------------------------------
