Re: tlug: Re: kernel modules (was: Kernel rebuild problem)

[Rex Walters <rex@example.com>]

On Wed, Sep 30, 1998 at 05:01:37PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> 
> I really don't understand your point (nor with respect to the other
> three [mis-]quotes).  To be melodramatic about it, we, _Ye Olde
> Garde_, see a real threat to our currently very satisfying community.

My admittedly knee-jerk reaction was to the "us and them" mentality.

I was also somewhat incoherently trying to point out that not all of the
"Olde Garde" feels that ease-of-use and hordes of novice/non-technical
users will be bad for the Linux community.  ("Olde Garde" is, of course,
doubly comedic in reference to anything as young as Linux or the
internet.)  

I was around for all three events, so perhaps I qualify as a member of
"Ye Olde Garde", but I don't see increasing the user population (even
with mostly clueless newbies) as a threat to the community.  Quite the
opposite: I very much want the Linux community to grow exponentially.

This is pure pragmatism on my part.  It's easier for me to implement
solid solutions for a customer running Linux on all his clients than it
is for a customer running Microsoft stuff.

I certainly agree that bad protocols, bad API's, bad programming
practices, bad implementation, bad administrative practices, etc. could
_become_ a threat, but I see a clear distinction between users and
implementors.  In any case, I see neither package management nor
loadable modules as "bad" in any sense.

In other words, I'm all for Ye Olde Garde protecting the protocols
and good programming practices, but doing this by keeping the community
small and self-contained is throwing the baby out with the bath.

> My statement quoted above was not a put down; it was an attempt to
> explain the formative context for my paranoia.  It's not a return to
> the good old days that I want; it's to avoid the return of some very
> bad old days.

I agree heartily.  I wasn't responding to the "formative context", I was
responding to the "parochial pedanticism".  ;-)

> 
> OK, it's impolite to make public the assumption that people migrating
> from the Wintel world probably were not hanging out on n.a.p in 1994.
> But surely that's not your main point?

No, I was just waving my Linux-advocacy flag.  I believe it's too easy
to continually make "in" references to Serdar Argic, "n.a.p", and such,
without realizing the harm it can do.

(btw -- it's been so long since I've read news regularly that I don't
remember.  What was "n.a.p" -- "news.abuse.pffthtth"?)

> 
>     Rex> (Hmm ... "There goes the neighborhood" perhaps?).
> 
> Yes, exactly.  Stripped of its historical racial/ethnic baggage, of
> course.  I don't want a crack house down my street, and I don't want
> to see proliferation of non-RFC-compliant MUAs---whether they are old
> Unix garbage, new M$-inspired garbage, or homegrown Linux garbage.
> 
> What's wrong with that?

Many people new to Linux are put off by the "attitude" of so many Linux
groups (a sentiment recently posted to this very list).  I'd hate to see
potential users reject linux unnecessarily.  I agree with your
sentiments with regard to developers, but what is wrong with novice
users?

> 
> I'm sorry, but it just so happens that a lot of the best (worst)
> examples of standards-noncompliance are M$-related.  Does that make me
> a bigot?

Yikes!  Have I somehow miscommunicated so badly that you think I'm
defending Microsoft standards compliance?

For the record, I'm a self-proclaimed Unix (and "TCP/IP" for lack of a
better generalism) bigot.  You may reasonably construe that as being
anti-Microsoft for most things.

> 
> "I don't want no GIFs on my lawn, just a JPEG I can help along."
> 
> What's wrong with that?  (Sorry, Cat.)  OK, I strongly sympathize with
> the point of view that Linux is a better community for being mostly a
> crowd of people who do rebuild kernels while the beer flows around
> them at the izakaya.  A bit strong....  But that's what gives life
> flavor ;-)

Personally, I'd like to see Linux as much more than that.  "World
Domination", as Linus jokes, would actually be a good thing in my book.
People would get more work done, and would spend less time and money on
"infrastructure" and administration.

You wouldn't believe some of the incredible inefficiencies I see at
customer sites that are 100% Unix and 100% TCP/IP.  Things like decent
package management and loadable kernel modules would be a tremendous
boon to these sites.

Microsoft networks are orders of magnitude worse.  I once heard
somewhere that Microsoft corporation internally spends something on the
order of 10% of their yearly *revenues* on corporate IS.  They have
armies of administrators to keep everything working.  By any rational
accounting the number should be under 0.1%.

Linux is too good to keep to ourselves.

> 
> IMHO, Linux is where it is today because it somehow maintained a
> precise balance between the "standards bigots" and the "innovation
> zealots."[1] 

I agree.  I'm also particularly fond of the IETF motto mentioned in the
Cathedral paper re: "rough consensus and working code".

>               I really truly doubt that "momentum" and "numbers" are as
> important to maintaining our community as that balance is.  Especially 
> when "momentum" is attributed to the "zealots," while the "bigots" are 
> derided as "inertial".

The balance is important, and I don't want to see it change abruptly,
but self-interest if nothing else makes me want to see Linux on as many
desktops running as many real "work I'm paid for" applications as
possible.

If I've offended, I apologize.  I know you're thick-skinned (you've said
as much on this list :-) and Chris has already let me know privately that I
needn't apologize, but I think I was overly harsh in my previous
message.

Best regards,
-- 
Rex
---------------------------------------------------------------
Next Meeting: 10 October, 12:30 Tokyo Station Yaesu central gate
Featuring the IMASY Eng. Team on "IPv6 - The Next Generation IP"
Next Nomikai: 20 November, 19:30  Tengu TokyoEkiMae 03-3275-3691
---------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsor: PHT, makers of TurboLinux http://www.pht.co.jp