Hi On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 10:40 PM, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Stephen Friedrich > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Mark Millman wrote: > > > The quality of Trinidad it a testament to how Open Source communities > work best. > > > > Well, ... > > I don't really agree, but maybe I am not involved deeply enough in the > community to judge. > > Without wanting to offend anyone personally - it seems to me that > > * it took forever to negotiate the legals of the first adf faces drop, > then it took another > > eternity until Trinidad 1.0 and again it took a series of minor > releases until Trinidad was > > mostly stable > > That is better than no donation at all
during INCUBATION nobody expets a release... the main idea is to build a community and not! to build code that first semesters could use to get their project done in 2 hours... ==> good community == good project/code > > > > * Oracle employees still do most of the work > > That is just because the Oracle employees are the ones choosing to do the > work > > > > * many people enjoy working on experimental stuff or whatever else they > like, all while > > bugs that affect basic functionality pile up in Jira > > How many of the bugs have you fixed? It is the whole community's > responsibility to maintain this code. That includes developers and > users. Before I became a developer I helped people on the mailing > lists and fixed some bugs and submitted new functionality for patches. :-) I was about to ask the same. but yes, community is the key of maintaining a large os project > > It is my opinion that since everyone is a Java developer that uses > Trinidad, they have the ability to fix any bugs they report. Almost > all the bugs that I fix are ones I report because I have a vested > interest in having them fixed. All users need to do is upload patches, > it is really quite simple. > > > > * documentation is, hm, let's say minimal. There isn't even some kind of > visual index to the > > components. No small usage example at each component's tag docs. > > That is even a step backwards from ADF Faces. > > Have you sent any documentation patches? This is the same as above, it > you don't like the documentation, figure out what it should be and > submit a patch. BTW, many of the original authors of this code are no > longer around, so anyone who has the initiative is the best person to > help the documentation. +1 > > > > * Now instead of working on Trinidad 2.0 Oracle decides to do yet another > component library. > > Discussions about the initial drop are undergoing, so we might see a > 1.0 release in 2010. > > By then it will be largely incompatible to the initial drop with all > the subtle difference > > being poorly documented. > > Once again, users should not complain about any problems if they are > not helping out. > > Summary: > > Open source software may be free in terms cost, but it is no where > near free for time reasons. An open source project is only as good as > the people and their effort that are contributing to it, whether > developers or users. > > If you want software that is tested, documented well and has support > and you are not willing to help, perhaps you ought to buy commercial > software instead. I think (since years) that most people don't want open SOURCE. they want software for 0 $. I totally agree with Andrew's opinion! -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
