4 ms·

But every person, sensible or not, has bills to pay. When you say "no sensible person goes into FOSS for the money" you are saying "most people can't afford to

But every person, sensible or not, has bills to pay. When you say "no sensible person goes into FOSS for the money" you are saying "most people can't afford to actively maintain a FOSS project", and you really can't claim that is in any way good for FOSS.

pjc50 7y ago
"Most people can't afford to actively maintain a FOSS project" has always been true. It has been a hobby for some, a privilege allowed by the workplaces of others, and in a few rare cases companies have been built that charge for consulting and manage to fund a distro or other project that way. Or dual-license tech like Trolltech.
- DagAgren 7y ago
  Yes, and I am saying that is not a great thing for FOSS.
  - krageon 7y ago
    Why isn't it a great thing for FOSS? It is what FOSS is, and FOSS is in a pretty great place right now.
    - DagAgren 7y ago
      Is it? Which part of the FOSS ideology or principles says that it's about doing things in your free time that you don't get paid for?
      - krageon 7y ago
        A movement is much larger than just the ideals or principles that have been written down. I was talking about it as it is, not as it claims to be.
        DagAgren 7y ago
        Well, then, you claim FOSS is in a great place. Is it really? SOME of it is, sure. The big successful projects. But what about the rest of it?
roenxi 7y ago
That doesn't sound like much of a change from the last 30 years. FOSS has done fine so far. Really the only thing that might work is if there was broad community acceptance of not changing all the lower parts of the software stack all the time so the maintenance burden is lower. Honestly; if we were interested in what was good for FOSS all that needs to happen is that hardware stops improving all the time. Then everyone can calm down, declare things finished and move on without requirements changing. The Linux graphic system (c.f. Xorg v. Wayland) still hasn't finished adjusting to graphics cards. That sort of change is bad for FOSS. In a sense, this sort of thing is what is being showcased here. The breaking changes to FUSE are probably going to be linked to design changes in Catalina triggered by RAM/CPU/Network changes and the RPM/SSD transition that has been going on for however long. When that sort of thing subsides in 50 years there is going to be this amazing FOSS renaissance as working things stop breaking because of hardware changes and the balance really tilts towards free & available software.
- DagAgren 7y ago
  I'm not sure the argument "FOSS has done fine so far" is that convincing when you then lay out many of the places where FOSS has been failing miserably.
  - __d 7y ago
    Not to forget the many, many places where it has and is succeeding happily. Here's my "get off my lawn" perspective: those developers who remember a world where there was little or no free software (from, say, the mid-1980's, when Sun made the C compiler a for-cost option on SunOS through until commercial Linux distributions), have a visceral understanding of free software that those who came to it later, and (perhaps understandably) take it for granted, don't have. Free software is a commons. In a healthy community, people pitch in to help, and maintainers become overwhelmed by the scale of activity, not because they've been left alone to support many users by themselves for years.
    - DagAgren 7y ago
      By that measure, a lot of FOSS is not a healthy community.
esotericn 7y ago
Most people can't afford to do effectively anything other than go to work and flop on the couch. I don't think that's a problem for FOSS, it's a problem (if you call it such) of the economic system that we live under. Generally the only realistic answer to that for most people at an individual level is to focus on financial security so that you don't have to care about that sort of fluff. Most people can't. That's how our world works. In the general case creatives earn effectively nothing and only a few blockbuster individuals 'make it', regardless of the field; and usually they have to go proprietary to some extent.
- ghettoimp 7y ago
  > Most people can't afford to do effectively anything other than go to work and flop on the couch. You're definitely right about this for folks who are barely scraping by, working multiple jobs, etc. But for folks in IT, taking the time to read and comment on HN... we make the time for what we choose to make the time for.

pjc50 7y ago

"Most people can't afford to actively maintain a FOSS project" has always been true. It has been a hobby for some, a privilege allowed by the workplaces of others, and in a few rare cases companies have been built that charge for consulting and manage to fund a distro or other project that way. Or dual-license tech like Trolltech.

DagAgren 7y ago
Yes, and I am saying that is not a great thing for FOSS.
- krageon 7y ago
  Why isn't it a great thing for FOSS? It is what FOSS is, and FOSS is in a pretty great place right now.
  - DagAgren 7y ago
    Is it? Which part of the FOSS ideology or principles says that it's about doing things in your free time that you don't get paid for?
    - krageon 7y ago
      A movement is much larger than just the ideals or principles that have been written down. I was talking about it as it is, not as it claims to be.
      - DagAgren 7y ago
        Well, then, you claim FOSS is in a great place. Is it really? SOME of it is, sure. The big successful projects. But what about the rest of it?

roenxi 7y ago

That doesn't sound like much of a change from the last 30 years. FOSS has done fine so far. Really the only thing that might work is if there was broad community acceptance of not changing all the lower parts of the software stack all the time so the maintenance burden is lower. Honestly; if we were interested in what was good for FOSS all that needs to happen is that hardware stops improving all the time. Then everyone can calm down, declare things finished and move on without requirements changing. The Linux graphic system (c.f. Xorg v. Wayland) still hasn't finished adjusting to graphics cards. That sort of change is bad for FOSS. In a sense, this sort of thing is what is being showcased here. The breaking changes to FUSE are probably going to be linked to design changes in Catalina triggered by RAM/CPU/Network changes and the RPM/SSD transition that has been going on for however long. When that sort of thing subsides in 50 years there is going to be this amazing FOSS renaissance as working things stop breaking because of hardware changes and the balance really tilts towards free & available software.

DagAgren 7y ago
I'm not sure the argument "FOSS has done fine so far" is that convincing when you then lay out many of the places where FOSS has been failing miserably.
- __d 7y ago
  Not to forget the many, many places where it has and is succeeding happily. Here's my "get off my lawn" perspective: those developers who remember a world where there was little or no free software (from, say, the mid-1980's, when Sun made the C compiler a for-cost option on SunOS through until commercial Linux distributions), have a visceral understanding of free software that those who came to it later, and (perhaps understandably) take it for granted, don't have. Free software is a commons. In a healthy community, people pitch in to help, and maintainers become overwhelmed by the scale of activity, not because they've been left alone to support many users by themselves for years.
  - DagAgren 7y ago
    By that measure, a lot of FOSS is not a healthy community.

esotericn 7y ago

Most people can't afford to do effectively anything other than go to work and flop on the couch. I don't think that's a problem for FOSS, it's a problem (if you call it such) of the economic system that we live under. Generally the only realistic answer to that for most people at an individual level is to focus on financial security so that you don't have to care about that sort of fluff. Most people can't. That's how our world works. In the general case creatives earn effectively nothing and only a few blockbuster individuals 'make it', regardless of the field; and usually they have to go proprietary to some extent.

ghettoimp 7y ago
> Most people can't afford to do effectively anything other than go to work and flop on the couch. You're definitely right about this for folks who are barely scraping by, working multiple jobs, etc. But for folks in IT, taking the time to read and comment on HN... we make the time for what we choose to make the time for.