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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,2e91a32061bde112 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu (David Starner) Subject: Re: JAVA and ADA JGNAT Date: 2000/01/26 Message-ID: <86n2lf$a2g1@news.cis.okstate.edu>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 577888517 References: <862sv5$sug$1@pirates.Armstrong.EDU> <862t3o$9aa1@news.cis.okstate.edu> <86k8r6$alp$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <86kpbu$aik1@news.cis.okstate.edu> Organization: Oklahoma State University User-Agent: slrn/0.9.6.2 (Linux) Reply-To: dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-01-26T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: On 26 Jan 2000 11:25:27 +0100, Preben Randhol wrote: >dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu (David Starner) writes: > >| But, in the context, I'd have to disagree. Many good products get >| released early in the development cycle to the public, to no >| harm to anyone. GCC, Linux, most open source projects, for > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >Which is also a problem with a lot of open source software. That is a >lot of them never makes it past the "I have a plan for a new app" >announcement and then the project dies out. I'd disagree. The problem is not that they're open, but that nobody did any work. It would have happened anyway, you just would never had heard about it. Linux and Debian GNU/Linux are two examples of projects that were open from the barest beginnings, and were successful partially because of it. >I think that one have overstressed the bazaar angle a bit to much. One >needs to at least get to the stage where the program is reasonably >usable to start attract users and then try to get more people to >help. Usually. I think our definitions of reasonably usable are different, though. Again, the Linux kernel was released at 0.0.1 and it worked well enough to attract developers (which is what's important to the success of a project, not users). >As for compilers I think this is even more crucial. I would rather >have a JGNAT that works well than an alpha product that makes the >programs crash a lot and thus gets a bad reputation. Sure. But I'd rather have a JGNAT than no JGNAT. And I don't find people getting much respect for complaining about a product that was marked ALPHA. I don't think it will get a bad reputation for alpha-class behavior as an alpha product. >But it might be >that I for general OS products expect them to be alpha or beta and >crash a lot, I don't expect compilers to do the same. :-) Then stop using the ones marked alpha or beta. I've seen very few open source products not marked alpha or beta that were not stable, and I've found many marked such that were. YMMV. -- David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org If you wish to strive for peace of soul then believe; if you wish to be a devotee of truth, then inquire. -- Friedrich Nietzsche