Mail Archives: geda-user/2015/07/02/23:04:57
Stefan Salewski wrote:
> maybe my impression that geda/gschem usage and development is
> nearly death is wrong?
Look, open source software development can not die! I react quite
strongly indeed to those who throw this ridiculous expression around!
The source code is there. Anyone who wants can pick it up and make a
change. Today, tomorrow, next month and next decade.
Development happens when it happens. If you need it sooner you get to
do it yourself or pay for it to get done by someone else. You already
know that this is the premise. You must be able to take
responsibility for your own problems, otherwise you can not benefit
from open source and should acquire a support contract from a service
provider who might benefit from open source.
And using alive and dead as measure of volunteer efforts makes no
sense whatsoever. It implies that there exists a single threshold
where development moves from being alive to being dead and vice
versa. That is of course, as I wrote, utterly ridiculous.
Development happens when someone makes a change.
I have often experienced people who measure software project
development simply by change quantity, which I can completely
understand, because it is the most trivial metric, but it is also a
really useless metric, since number of changes say ABSOLUTELY NOTHING
about whether a codebase is improving or deteriorating.
//Peter
- Raw text -