[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Bravo! On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 18:32:46 +0000, Neil Williams <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wednesday 19 January 2005 5:19 pm, Terence McCarthy wrote:My objection to the name GLUG is not that I object to RMS's stance on Gnu/Linux, but that it is confusing to the non- Linux user who will probably know absolutely nothing the reasons behind it. Linux they may know- Gnu/Linux they won't. It's a pragmatic stance, not a philosophical one.I disagree that there is any role for confusion, it's about choice - see other email.This month's Linux Format (or is it User?) has a comparative review of some dozen distributions- if I was curious about Linux this would turn me off completely. It's just so confusing to someone new to FOSS. Are all these Linux? If so, what is Linux? How do I get the right one?GNU/Linux is about choice, about options. There IS no 'right one' that can be determined in advance. There's nothing wrong with that. We cannot presume to know what will suit any particular user best. It is their choice - we serve only to put the options out there, advise on what the differences mean in practice and let the user make an educated choice. That's sufficiently new and unusual for most Windows users. :-)I think it's important to note that without either component part we wouldn't have our great systems, but I also feel it's important that what "Linux" is, as an OS, is as open, clear and obvious to those unfamiliar with it. Call it Linux, and it's clarity is on a par with Apple and M$.But OSX doesn't interface with Linux, it runs GNU.Call it Linux in some places and Gnu/Linux in others will only lead to more confusion than exists already.It merely reflects the options that already exist. It is no good thinking that we can ignore certain distributions from the portfolio just because, personally, we don't like to use that one. There is no one Linux system and that's a GOOD thing.I also feel that many of those who argue for Gnu/Linux do so for reasons that are not necessarily the best - there are many who roll their own systems, never install anything they haven't compiled themselves, and appear to believe that Linux should remain a geek preserve,See later - it is imperative that new users become confident users who become contributors - in whatever way. Not everyone can write code but nearly everyone can write documentation or run the project website or answer simple queries from new users on the project mailing lists. I'm not arguing for a geek preserve but for users to recognise that they have a contribution to make. Whatever you think of GNU/Linux, the system will die if not enough new contributors are found to meet the needs of growth. Everything about this group and others should be geared towards enabling existing users to make a contribution. For some that will be encouraging new members and new users, for others, it must include making their mark on the wider community for the benefit of all.in which of course, they feel completely at home.I argue for GNU/Linux for one simple reason: I believe it is the right thing to do. I don't write Linux software. I don't write software for Linux. I write GNU software.Others, and I am one of them, would like to see Linux much more mainstream, because it is a broad church and need exclude no-one.Dead right. There's nothing wrong with being mainstream as long as sufficient new users are motivated to understand the principles behind the OS and to help out. We cannot afford to have lots of new users who never grow in experience and never contribute. They aren't paying for the system, there are no means to magically increase the number of people to answer their queries without those new users themselves taking on the mantle of making a contribution. This isn't a commercial enterprise with one conglomerate in charge. We are a community and we need to foster diversity, choice, options and knowledge. We must respect the other disciplines within the whole and that means giving credit where it is due. The community comes first, let's not get into a race of chasing new users at the expense of keeping the revolution / evolution rolling. Arguably OS/2 did that, and Apple had their days of trying the same technique. No, growth will come from developing current users in the community to a point where as many as possible contribute regularly in any way they can. Growth will stall as soon as the demands of users outstrip the capacity of the developers. This is a voluntary effort and if you push developers too hard, the project can die. Corporate models can generate more cash as they grow and therefore employ more developers. Free software must recruit more developers from the existing base on a voluntary basis and they can leave as quickly as they join. I've seen this happen on certain projects. The developers spend so long answering queries on mailing lists from new users who don't or won't read the FAQ, that future development stagnates. Releases get missed, the code gets patchy and messy. Finally, the project either has to do a Netscape -> Mozilla style re-write from the ground up or just die. Sadly, most in this situation just die. Keeping a large project alive during a full scale rewrite is not easy. All it takes to keep these projects running is for a few of the more confident users to answer some of the more banal queries on behalf of the developers. That is exactly what happens on this list - new people pop up regularly who answer queries that others would have answered in the past. That frees up time for whatever else those people need to do. All I seek is for everyone on this list to contribute in every whichever way they can to this list and to others. Every project is asking for help, every project needs people with a variety of skills. One of the most pressing needs for almost every project is DOCUMENTATION. If you can use the program and describe that in an email, you can write the docs. These little, simple things make an immense contribution because every page of documentation reduces the number of repetitive queries from new users. All it needs is for members of this list to speak up on other mailing lists for their favourite program or utility and offer their help. Be clear what you can and cannot do, be honest if you don't have much time and just make yourself known. Even a few hours a month could make an enormous difference to a small project. Consider things like: 1. docs 2. Bug triage - just using the latest version of the software and trying to reproduce the bugs described in the reports. If it's not reproducible, it reduces the workload of the developers. 3. Mailing list - user and devel. Get involved with any project you feel you can use confidently. There are lots of people who join mailing lists to ASK, be one of those precious people who join mailing lists to ANSWER. 4. Websites. If your favourite project has a lack-lustre website, offer to help. 5. If you have coding experience, say so and please use it. You don't have to have a project of your own, just pick a favourite project that appears to use code that you can understand and offer to help. Be clear about what you can do. If, like me, your GUI skills are laughable, say so and work on the backend code instead.From the occasional and casual web browser to the geekiest geek of all the geeks, Linux has the power to be what each of us wants it to be.That cannot ever be achieved without making dozens of slightly different flavours of GNU/Linux to meet differing needs. To truly meet the needs of each user (rather than squash them into a MSOffice straightjacket), you must provide endless options and choice on and within the base system. Such choice is necessary, beneficial and healthy. We're all different - the greatest insult anyone can make is to think that we can all use a single system. I back Debian to the hilt, but I appreciate that some users are better off with others. Some users will always be better off with Windows - there's no harm in that. There's no point in trying to bankrupt MS, there is everything to gain from keeping Windows developers on their toes and showing what can be done.We should be endevouring to make Linux open and accessable to all, andAbsolutely. We only differ on how to achieve that aim.anything that leads to confusion, uncertainty or doubt will hinder that.Untrue. Restricting choice will make it utterly impossible to make GNU/Linux open and accessible to all. One system will NEVER fit all, neither will half a dozen. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.dcglug.org.uk/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/isbnsearch/ http://www.williamsleesmill.me.uk/ http://www.biglumber.com/x/web?qs=0x8801094A28BCB3E3
-- ~ Ben Goodger ~ Join MSN Hotmail today and get free spam delivered straight to your inbox! ~ www.getfirefox.com -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.