3 ms·
Sure, but that's "the resources of Canonical" (more like a small amount of Canonical's already relatively meagre development resources, on a project that is not
by jdub 12y ago
Sure, but that's "the resources of Canonical" (more like a small amount of Canonical's already relatively meagre development resources, on a project that is not exactly a crucial enabler or breadwinner) vs. practically everyone else in the Open Source industry and community.
- peatmoss 12y agoIn my experience, "practically everyone else in the Open Source industry and community" only means the developers are N > 0. I like to believe that N -> Infinity, but I think very many projects N -> 0. There are few open source projects where even one or two talented, dedicated, full-time developers would not represent a substantial increase in labor. There was just an article posted a day or two ago talking about how people would be surprised if they knew how small some teams at Apple really were. This isn't to disparage F/OSS development. I still believe in the development model more than others. I just think we need to be realistic about project resources. Open source isn't magic in this regard.
- jdub 12y agoUnscientific, but: mir$ bzr log --include-merged | grep committer: | sed 's#.*<##' | sort -u | wc -l 59 vs. wayland$ git log --format='%aN' | sort -u | wc -l 105 (And there's some messiness in the bzr output that inflates the mir figure somewhat.)