| Who we are | Organizations | Get Involved! | Helpdesk |
| Weblog | About FLORA | Server project | F.A.Q. |
|
|
|||||||
| ||||||||
Election 2006 (and beyond): Digital Copyright Canada
From: pjlahaie_-at-_atlsci.com (Paul J.Y. Lahaie)
Date: 6 Apr 1999 12:39:37 -0400
References: <3707A3FB.60674F8E@vsnl.com>
Russell McOrmond wrote:
> > The Linux os is dependent on Linus & co. What if Linus & co stop
> > development in future? There is no perpetual succession.
> > What if they split up? You have no guarantee.
>
> Could someone explain to me what the phrase 'split up' means in a Free
> Software context? Who is Linus & co? It sounds like this is discussing a
> bunch of buddies when in reality some of the personalities cannot stand
> each other and do not work well together. What does 'succession' mean in
> a distributed computing and development model?
I think he's referring to Linus, Alan Cox, Dave Miller, Stephen
Tweedie, etc.. who do a large part of the core Linux kernel parts.
Linux would probably not be where it is today if it weren't for the
massive efforts put into it by that group. Look what happened to the
*BSD crowd. For a long time the *BSD OS was far superior to Linux, yet
it never got the attention Linux got because of the politics and the
code splits. If Dave Miller started releasing his own "Linux v2.x.x"
and Linus another one and .... The usefulness of Linux in the market
place would seriously hampered by compatibility issues which would
surely arise.
The main reason Linux is successful today is because Linus is
competent leader. Perhaps someone could have filled his shoes early on,
but then again, maybe not.
- Paul
| Please read the FLORA.org Terms and Conditions before you submit information to FLORA.org | |
Join the Blue Ribbon Online Free Speech Campaign(USA) (Canada) |
 FLORA Community Web
(FLORA.ORG) is sponsored by FLORA
Community Consulting (FLORA.CA).
|