Re: Progress on AdaOS

["Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>]

I would suggest that what you are talking about looks an awful lot like
"barter". "I'll contribute X and Y and Z if you'll contribute A and B and
C." (And a bunch of other people get a free ride after you've got your
exchange) I have no problem with that and never have said I had a problem
with that. I don't have any problem at all if you write me an OS and hope
that maybe one day I'll write you a compiler. You'll at least get my undying
gratitude. :-) Why you might choose to do so is none of my business and no
matter how hard you try, you won't be able to make me care. :-) You are more
than welcome to put out as much free software as you like and maybe there
are benefits to you because of others having a similar attitude or because
of the satisfaction you get from writing software.

My point can be illustrated by the following two hypothetical propositions:

1) Please come mow my lawn out of the joy you get from spending time in the
sun and the thrill you get looking out the window at my nice tidy yard and
the exercise you get by taking the lawnmower out for a walk. I promise to
say "thank you" and maybe even give you a glass of lemonade when you're
done.

2) Please come mow my lawn because if you do, I'll give you
$1,000,000,000.00, a six-month-long cruise to the Bahamas on your own
private yacht, with your own private, and very accommodating, all-girl crew
who are backed up by a small team of experts who's job it is to dream up new
and interesting ways for them to be nice to you.

Which hypothetical proposition is more likely to attract lawn crews to my
yard this Saturday?

That's what I mean about finding a way to structure a project such that the
participants stand to gain something besides a warm, fuzzy feeling from it.
A partnership of developers that stand to gain some kind of financial reward
from developing an OS are far more likely to produce an OS that works
sometime before Hell freezes over than will a crew of hobbyists who stand to
gain very little from contributing to the project except personal
gratification and the potential to tempt others into writing software they
can use under similar terms.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/


"Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" <ve3wwg@home.com> wrote in message
news:3B83DE1A.7770DC9C@home.com...
>
> Unless I lived across the street from you, and had to look
> at your un-mowed lawn, there is no benefit for me to mow
> your lawn for free. ;-)
>
> However the Open Sourced approach means that I can contribute to the
> general good, and continue to reap its benefits. This is still "free
> labour", but the difference is that I derive some "benefit" from the
> process (my contributions will be propagated and/or improved). You
> of course derive the benefit of my contribution as well.
>
> Note however, I am not discouraging "profit" as such, since we all need
> that to pay our mortgages with. I just think we need to remember that
> some forms of "free labour" do enjoy _real_ defined advantages. Having
> free access to GNAT/gcc, Linux/FreeBSD are some that I count as
> important.
>
> Consequently, I personally feel that where possible, I should,
> as others have done and continue to do, contribute what I can
> to further these efforts. This helps to keep the "hobby" fun,
> and everybody benefits.
>
> Companies of course, _must_ do differently, since the "hobby"
> thing does not fly with the shareholders ;-)
> --
> Warren W. Gay VE3WWG
> http://members.home.net/ve3wwg