Adam,

THANKS...!  See inline.  (Started this earlier, but just getting back to
it.)

jt

| [mailto:midrange-l-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Adam Lang
| Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 8:57 AM
|
|
| That's the beauty though.  Samba has done all the reverse
| engineering.  All
| that is being done is a port of the code to AS/400.

That's the good news.

|
| As for not doing it GPL, you have no choice if you are using Samba code
| base.

That's the bad news.

|
| Ya never know, if you do a good enough job, IBM might hire ya to help
| support it if they adopt it.

That's the ugly news...

What I mean is, the so-called theory behind "Open" Source is that you do all
this work for free, and somehow.. someway... magically.....  You get paid
for it somewhere down the line.  Can't sell it, though, for SOME UNKNOWN
REASON...


| You have to think of it this way
| also, all the
| work has already been done and you get the beneift of it for
| free.

All in favor of that principle.  If others did the work for free, then you
can't take their work and capitalize on it.  I'm in favor of that principle,
but don't find it very practical.  Maybe it's just Puritan roots, which most
in America have regardless of what generation American you are.

| You are
| just doing a little porting... compared tot he whole picture, not
| something
| to get too defensive about to give for free.

See above.

| You aren't building a better
| mouse trap.  You're just moving the mouse trap someone else built
| to another
| room of the house.

Here's the thing:  This is one of those statements that are part true, and
part false.  In this context, there IS a BETTER MOUSETRAP...  A mousetrap
better than NetServer.  BUT, it's true.. if porting Samba, rather than
starting from scratch, you're adding on to the mousetrap someone else
donated...

(Which is one reason, besides being easier, why I prefer running Samba on
PASE.  IF (big if) it's efficient and reliable (ie effective.)

|
| Something like this would be more hobby/enthusiast oriented.

And this is my problem with the Apache Foundation (formerly the Apache
Group).  I like the model..  MUCH BETTER than the RMS/ESR/Linus "trinity".

However, I don't find it very practical.

How many times have you read something to the effect: "Apache is run by
volunteers.  This is a good feature, that will be added when time is
available"?  Have you seen on the Apache website "Apache is ALWAYS LOOKING
FOR VOLUNTEERS, especially in the areas of testing and documentation"?

Is this anyway to run a business.  Just because you give the software for
free, doesn't mean it's NOT big business.  I agree with RMS that "cost"
doesn't really relate to the concept of "free", in this respect.  Nor does
"free" relate to the concept of "business".  Apache runs the vast majority
of websites.  Doesn't matter if these websites are in academia, charitable
organizations, big business or small...  Apache is BIG BUSINESS, but just
isn't run like one.


This is why I say the Apache model is GREAT...!  As far as it goes...  But
it stops WAY short, IMHO, of being practical.

The practical approach is exactly how the iSeries implemented Apache.  To an
Open Source project and improved on it.  They do the docs and testing in a
thoroughly professional manner...

(Don't see them likely to do that with GPL'd projects, which is why it
stinks that Samba is GPL'd, IMHO.)


<snip Original Messages>



As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2022 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.