-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Tuesday 16 November 2004 03:57 it was so written: > Hi,
Good morning. > Interesting stuff you have written. Thank you. > I am raising this issue for personal reason. I am coming across > more and more positive reports about free software in the media. It's too big to ignore, now. The "media" tend to not understand people who do things for reasons that are different from the ones the reporter and editor believe in. Thus their confusion about why Bin Laden attacked the United States, for example, no matter how often or clearly he states his reasons. > I am seriously thinking about switching over completely to free > software for home as well as business use. Before doing so, I need > to know how viable is the whole free software movement in the long > term. Depends on what you mean by "long term". For example, the documents I have that were written in Microsoft Word 2 are unreadable by anything now produced. Nothing that Microsoft has made since Word 6 will read them. Not even Office 95. Does that mean that Microsoft is not viable in the long term? For me it does. The same can be said of other closed, proprietary file formats and protocols. > Simply put, will it last? Open protocols last. Clear published standards last longer because it's easy to interoperate with other software (and hardware) when things are clearly spelled out. Numerous individuals building to the same standard creates an inertia that makes changing the standard difficult, unlike a format or protocol owned by one person or group. > This will also form the basis of my > choice of distro. I have read briefly about Free Software > Foundation, Open Source, GPL, etc, and of course Debian. Consider that Debian has clearly defined standards. The Free Software Guidelines, the .DEB package standards, clear and unambiguous policies concerning how the package must work within Debian as a whole. If you've been reading the "Why Debian" thread, many well informed people have stated that these standards are the reason that the Debian distribution is so internally consistant and reliable. I suggest you try it on one system, a test drive as it were. See how it feels to you. There is a good reason there are many distributions, just like there are many different styles and brands of automobile. > I think > the success of a distro, or for that matter the whole free software > movement, will depend on two factors. > > 1. The availability of dedicated developers to continuously improve > on the products. Actually, I have to question this as an absolute. I want a server to do exactly what I tell it to do, nothing more and nothing less. So if I set up a server with a suite of software that does exactly what I want it to do, I don't care if the entire system is obsolete the next day so long as it works. There is a story about an older building, where one day the airconditioning stopped functioning. There was nothing wrong with the airconditioner unit, which was easy to check, but the ventilation control system wasn't working. The problem was no one could find it. By tracing wires, behind a wall, they found a PDP-8 that had so clogged with dust over the decades it had been sealed away, forgotten, that it finally had shut down. The maintenance people cleaned the PDP, made sure all the hardware was in good shape, powered it back on, and let it go back to doing what it had been doing so well for so long even when no one had known it was doing it. There was no need for a new system, this one worked. That is the lesson of the server. Debian "Stable" is exactly that, "stable". The applications archive is locked, except for security updates, and you can be secure in the knowledge that your server will work tomorrow as well as it does today, and in exactly the same way. No surprises. Bullet-proof. For personal systems which change often, keeping up with changes in hardware (especially) and expectations means software must evolve. That's why there is Debian "Unstable". Debian keeps up with the cutting edge, I believe, because interested individuals have a very low barrier to entry into Debian package development. There are always new people interested in making software work better for themselves, which in turn makes it work better for everyone. > 2. The user base, in particular its size, growth > rate and influence. Size and growth rate will motivate developers > and attract more to the fold. It sure feel good to know that what > you do benefits a lot of people. That "feel good" is one of the payback methods, and it's a real one, but it doesn't put food on the table. Have you read, _The Cathedral and the Bazaar_ by Eric S. Raymond? http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/ > As for influential users, the name > of big corporations will add a shine to the product. Subjective judgement. I don't care if MacBig is using Debian, because Debian isn't an application. It's a set of guidelines, protocols, and interested individuals. Many MacBigs are using RedHat, that doesn't make RedHat attractive to me in the slightest. Many MacBigs are using Windows, that doesn't make Windows attractive to me either. There is only a tiny fraction of the software that constitutes Debian that is Debian specific. Apt, dpkg, dselect, things like that. The rest, kernel to fonts, is available on every other Linux distribution, most are used on BSD, Solaris and HURD, as well as some applications like OpenOffice.org which works perfectly well on Windows. > Don't forget > the government. Governments all over the world are big time users > of IT. Adoption of free software by governments willl provide a > strong impetus for its growth. Only if they don't decide to take it over. Remember what happened with roads! The FCC recently stated that they have regulatory jurisdiction over everything to do with communications. Everything! If tomorrow they decided to mandate IPv7, or prohibit encrypted VoIP or email, or "Peer to Peer" applications? By regulating, governments create chaos, but that's another discussion. "Growth" by itself is not always a good thing. > Where does Debian stand in regard to the above two points? The Debian organization is at least as viable as any other. I suggest that it is more reliable than any commercial entity, because there is no bottom line to protect. What few decisions are made (since the guidelines and policies are already in place) can be made based on what works rather than what sells. The Debian organization is more viable than any governmental organization, again because it exists as a group of interested individuals. There is no coercion, no empire building, so developers and users do what works best within the clearly defined and open guidelines, standards and policies. > I came > across a site which mentioned that Redhat is the most popular > distro but Debian is the fastest growing. On the other hand, I > noticed that Debian CDs are not as widely available as Redhat's in > the shop. "Debian" does not produce a box to sell. If you want to, please go right ahead. Once Sarge is released as the next stable version of Debian, I expect that a set of commercial books on "Using Debian", complete with CD(s), will again be published just like they were the last few times there was a major Debian release. http://www.linux.org/perl-bin/search_db?qid=4&spp=20&q=Debian > There are even pirated CDs of Redhat and Mandrake. How > does Debian promote itself? Interested individuals. I gladly will make an install CD for anyone who I talk to who is interested. When the question comes up in a forum or discussion, I say that I use Debian and am quite happy with it. People who are interested will try it, and stay with it if they like how it functions for themselves. > I personally came across Debian through > search in the Net. Does Debian pro-actively promot itself, e.g. > through ads? So did I. "Debian" does not buy advertizing space, but people who publish those books I talked about do. Sometimes interested developers will man a booth at a LinuxWorld or other such trade show, and tout the benefits of Debian. But again, there is no "bottom line" to protect. Debian stands along side every other distribution in places like DistroWatch.com and Linux.org where each distribution is treated equally. Even ones I personally consider undesirable or obsolete. Interested individuals coming together for shared goals works very well indeed. When the Debian organization passes, just like all things do, it will be because people are no longer interested in keeping it going. Jinse kona monsa. > Opinions and comments are welcomed. Good luck in your decision, I hope whatever you choose works well for you. That is, after all is said and done, what is most important. > Ken Curt- > > Curt Howland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've also been watching the "Why Debian?" thread with great > interest. I started using Debian in 1995 because I liked the idea > of cooperative development. I am an advocate of unanimity, I > believe that the best in people is a matter of interested > individuals working together because they want to. The Debian > package maintainers demonstrate this principle on a large scale. > > >A big project like this will definitely incur expenses. Do > > volunteers contribute financially too? If that is the case, in my > > opinion, Debian could disappear in two possible ways. > > Maintainers contribute their efforts voluntarily. From doing so, > they gain experience and renown. These skills are then available > for them to use in whatever work they do that earns them money. > > Debian is used in many businesses, and some of them contribute > money and hardware, mirror servers, bandwidth, etc. I have read > specifically of one company which, upon deciding to switch a > substantial number of systems to Debian, donated to the project the > quantity of money they had already budgetted to purchasing the > needed software. > > >1. The volunteers decided that there should be some financial > > reward for their work. They could accept an offer by a well > > established enterprise to 'buy' over their work or they could > > collectively decide to form a corporation. > > Their work is released to the Debian project under the GPL or other > Debian Project approved license. If they take their work elsewhere, > the last version of their software given to the Debian project > stays with the project and another package maintainer will pick it > up if, and only if, someone wants to. > > >2. Volunteers dwindle to an ineffective few, preferring to spend > >their time on work with more reward and recognition. > > Again, this is a voluntary organization. The maintainers associate > with the project because they wish to. > > If there are not enough maintainers, it means that the Debian > project has lost the support needed to sustain itself. Better to > let it fall into the dustbin of history than to corrupt it with > coercion to prolong the agony. > > >What is the geographical spread of the Debian organisation, is it > >US-centric? Are the developers mostly US-based? > > While the people who started it were located in the US, and the > primary "root" servers are located there, package maintainers can > and do come from everywhere. Since it is the work which matters, > all that a maintainers needs is an internet connection and enough > English to be able to communicate clearly. > > >Right now, under the initiative of Oracle, there are companies in > >China, Japan and S. Korea coming together to develop another > > version of Linux called Asianux. This may start a new trend of > > 'regional Linux'. > > Sure it may. If that is what succeeds, then that is what the users > want. Debian has excellent multi-language support, Asian languages > included. While I might choose to contribute to Debian rather than > to build something from scratch, it's not my choice what other > people do. > > >I roughly know that the US and non-US version got to do with > >encryption. But what is the restriction? People in US or outside > > US can download either version, right? > > The "International Trafficking In Arms Regulation", the prosecution > of which was abandoned by the US government after it was > demonstrated to be absurd and unenforceable, said that it was > illegal for Americans to export encryption software. So packages > with strong encryption had to be located only on servers outside of > the US. Americans could *import* such software all they wanted. > Absurd. > > There are still some legalities that get in the way of US software > development, such as the various insane copyright and patent laws, > so non-US.debian.org will remain I guess. > > Curt- - -- September 11th, 2001 The proudest day for gun control and central planning advocates in American history -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iQEVAwUBQZpNQi9Y35yItIgBAQEhSQf/XP1wEbxYXnioY9BAQ16nWwl+8arHkxn3 uhu6vByfG7ay3QCRgX70wQKB30SB1GDNjriG2rfqhUz3LF0yliARd42aF6Eru+6F r1iI0HPjdSKjaZGTPWI8QTqPD943qpfD1RbsGkbby6ynVnIvfDyOGY78WdGuCNf1 Q9/Wp/3tFE11QJGGakV/UNViBDq8r87HgZEf2sR09OrXdaaze53XsH0zzwi3iySK 6AXm4iMZk6ooSCRdwJmnXJcIL74eL1UWOpCHi6ytLFmEi2fMtR146CSitji2zq6g wG5J1MdHIQPqt14EXsanU0pOe59p0O7NOL7lz3j+8BHtipbsYBZQ/A== =XbNQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
