From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,ac39a12d5faf5b14 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-20 17:38:20 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: How Open Source software developers pay the bills, from within a successful such operation (was): Open Source: in conflict with the development process in the Ada community? Date: 20 Apr 2002 17:38:20 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <5ee5b646.0204201638.541ebae8@posting.google.com> References: <3CB94312.5040802@snafu.de> <4519e058.0204150645.62003096@posting.google.com> <3CBCEB15.E104D1F5@adaworks.com> <35c5c360dfe83cb34ea9648445bd0e95.48257@mygate.mailgate.org> <5ee5b646.0204190620.1902ede@posting.google.com> <5ee5b646.0204200841.2365b39e@posting.google.com> <87bsce1bve.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.38.14 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1019349500 18245 127.0.0.1 (21 Apr 2002 00:38:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 21 Apr 2002 00:38:20 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:22843 Date: 2002-04-21T00:38:20+00:00 List-Id: Florian Weimer wrote in message news:<87bsce1bve.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>... > dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) writes: > > According to Eric S. Raymond, "Open Source" does not > necessarily imply the Bazaar model, the Cathedral model > (which was once common to many GNU projects---Emacs, for > example, joined the Bazaar only rather > recently) is still considered "Open Source". Well I don't think Eric defines these terms for the industry :-) When people worry about "open source" what they are usually worrying about is an open and uncontrolled development process. Of course there can be closed and uncontrolled development and open and controlled development, but there is a significant perception that open tends to go with uncontrolled, and to some extent that's reasonable, if you want a community to participate energetically then you can't tie their hands too tightly :-)