Re: Open Source

["Scott M. Stone" <sstone@example.com>]

On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Simon Cozens wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 07:29:48PM +0900, Jonathan Shore wrote:
> > I should have mentioned, the other problem was that there was no single
> > manager.  Each region had its own and frankly each region had its own
> > priorities.  To me this is very characteristic of the management of many
> > open source projects.
> 
> Hmm, let's see:
>     Linux     - nope, single manager: Linus

load of crap.  What about Alan and ALL the other folks involved?  Linus
doesn't have absolute say over many things anymore, IIRC.  Besides, the
various distributions fork the kernel, add patches, etc, etc, so it isn't
really valid saying that Linus is the "single manager" for Linux.

>     XEmacs    - nope, single manager: (Who is it this week, Vin Shelton?)

Um, aren't you sort of contradicting yourself?  having a single,
weekly-rotating manager is almost as bad as having multiple managers in
the first place.

> <Twofish> Pokemon seems an evil concept. Kid hunts animals, and takes
> them from the wild into captivity, where he trains them to fight, and
> then fights them to the death against other people's pokemon. Doesn't
> this remind you of say, cock fighting?

what's wrong with cock fighting?

--------------------------
Scott M. Stone, CCNA <sstone@example.com>
UNIX Systems and Network Engineer
Taos - The SysAdmin Company