On 9/13/2022 11:53 AM, Michael Stone wrote: > On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 11:27:43AM -0400, Chuck Zmudzinski wrote: > >On 9/13/2022 12:36 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 03:32:27PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > >> > >> > [...] "I can't get personalized/dedicated support with enforceable > >> > SLAs for free" > > > >If the requirement that maintainers and developers of free/oss software must > >actually > >fix the bugs reported to them is not enforced, then free/oss software *is* > >vulnerable to > >all kinds of malicious activity by the "volunteers" who create the free/oss > >software. > > Enforced by whom? How?
The users. They stop using software or any product that does not work well or is more trouble than it is worth. Then the entity, whether a free/oss or proprietary provider ends up shutting down the enterprise. > You do realize that nobody enforces that on > proprietary software either, right? The users do, in the marketplace - and what is not used by enough users eventually disappears. > THIS IS NOT A CHARACTERISTIC THAT > DISTINGUISHES OPEN SOURCE AND CLOSED SOURCE SOFTWARE. Given that, > continuing this discussion seems silly. (Especially since it appears > that you'll simply to repeat your original assertion, mistaken though it > is, without even trying to address to the points that others have made.) > I think it is true that the "best" software development model depends less on free/oss vs. proprietary and more on the wisdom, foresight, integrity, and technical expertise of those doing the work and making the important decisions. Best regards, Chuck
