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: 103376,4c2e8ba92f29718c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada open source References: From: Brian May X-Home-Page: http://snoopy.apana.org.au/~bam/ Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 13:47:03 +1000 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:imVbtEJ44UQrj8Yv28OPMfTWunQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl-202-173-153-89.vic.westnet.com.au X-Trace: news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com 1087357623 202.173.153.89 (16 Jun 2004 13:47:03 +1000) X-Complaints-To: abuse@pipenetworks.com X-Abuse-Info: Please forward all headers to enable your complaint to be properly processed. Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.moat.net!border1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!border2.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news1.optus.net.au!optus!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com!not-for-mail Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1560 Date: 2004-06-16T13:47:03+10:00 List-Id: >>>>> "Steve" == Steve writes: Steve> Please cite a piece of closed source software that is Steve> "feature complete" and bug free. First step: define "feature complete"! There always seems to be room for adding new features. Even the traditional "hello world" program is not immune. Check out the feature rich "hello world" program available at: for instance. There appear to be three versions of this in Debian. What is more important is: "does it meet my requirements?" rather then "does it have all possible features including the ability to make a cup of coffee". I don't think it is possible to write software that will meet everyone's requirements. When you do find such software, no doubt it will be so bloated with features 99% people don't use that it will be unusable for 99% people ;-). Getting back to the original post. I would speculate the posting was written by a user rather then a programmer, hence the significance of having source code available may not be obvious. The way I read it: closed source is better then open source because open source authors concentrate more on major development, bug fixes and security fixes rather then adding small features. If so, aren't these all reasons why (a) open source is better, because the authors want to get the program "correct" before adding endless numbers of small features and (b) using Ada might save time with bug fixes and security fixes? I would suggest that the problem with closed-source packages is that, in a number of cases, the author gives the users what they want, without designing it correctly, without testing it correctly, without securing it correctly, etc, and as users cannot see the source code they don't know what the quality of the coding is like. Another issue with closed-source packages I have encountered from time to time occurs if the author abandons the product; it is no longer possible to legally obtain it, no longer possible to get even the simplest bugs fixed, etc. Replacing the software may require replacing hardware, even though the current system generally works fine. -- Brian May