- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
The Linux Foundation's "Community" Doesn't Look Very Community
|
|
|
Comments (5)
Hey, Hans -- How's that ax you're grinding coming along?
I think Carla's blog touches on a very important issue very eloquently, and I agree with her (and frankly I don't see how she's becoming more "radical," as you put it).
However one of the comments on her blog seems to hit it on the head: The Linux Foundation (and I'm paraphrasing here) is more representative of the corporate world than that of the LUG-based, decentralized Linux community. Not that it makes it right -- it doesn't -- but it explains a lot.
I think Carla's blog touches on a very important issue very eloquently, and I agree with her (and frankly I don't see how she's becoming more "radical," as you put it).
However one of the comments on her blog seems to hit it on the head: The Linux Foundation (and I'm paraphrasing here) is more representative of the corporate world than that of the LUG-based, decentralized Linux community. Not that it makes it right -- it doesn't -- but it explains a lot.
@Icafieri
I would also think that M$ would want to secretly infiltrate the "LUG-based, decentralized Linux community" as well as it does so openly for the corporate world, whether that corporate world is Linux Foundation-connected or not. This whole CodePlex thing which was announced just before theBeez started his ax-grinding against Carla seems to reinforce this M$ desire to extract what it needs to from Linux Foundation-types or similar.
fb
> The Linux Foundation (and I'm paraphrasing here) is more representative of the corporate world than that of the LUG-based, decentralized Linux community.
The corporate world pays the Linux Foundation's bills. The LUG's don't. It's that simple.
Which leads to the simple corollary that if we want desktop Linux supported the way corporate Linux is, then we need to find a way to start paying the developers to do so. So far, we haven't been able to find a way to do that, so corporate needs get 90% of the developer attention.
I'd guess that the only reason desktop Linux works as well as it does is probably because most of the developers also use Linux for their desktops, and therefore have an interest in it working well there too.
The corporate world pays the Linux Foundation's bills. The LUG's don't. It's that simple.
Which leads to the simple corollary that if we want desktop Linux supported the way corporate Linux is, then we need to find a way to start paying the developers to do so. So far, we haven't been able to find a way to do that, so corporate needs get 90% of the developer attention.
I'd guess that the only reason desktop Linux works as well as it does is probably because most of the developers also use Linux for their desktops, and therefore have an interest in it working well there too.
@lcafiero
"Hey, Hans -- How's that ax your grinding coming along?"
http://thebeezspeaks.blogspot.com/2009/09/successful-women-i...
Hans Bezemer
http://thebeezspeaks.blogspot.com/2009/09/successful-women-i...
Hans Bezemer
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
http://www.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2009-09-18-03...