On 02/15/2014 08:09 PM, walt wrote: > On 02/15/2014 12:30 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote: >> The social >> tactics at work from the systemd team (and verily, other Red Hat >> projects like GNOME) are reminiscent of Microsoft through the use of the >> "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" methodology. > > I certainly share your hostility towards M$ for suppressing competition. > > Red Hat, like M$, is a for-profit corporation, so I share your suspicion > that they want to suppress their competitors (though I don't know who > their competitors are). > > But comparing a completely closed-source shop like M$ to any open source > company leaves me feeling uneasy. I can't find the exact argument to > explain my unease, but I'm hoping someone else will jump in with a more > rational argument. > > >
I think I understand where you're coming from. "How can they compare when Red Hat releases their source under a liberating license while MS locks it down behind closed doors?" That's missing the point, though. In the FOSS world, that's the "bait", so to speak. The wolf in sheep's clothing. Red Hat can release (or hack on) a bunch of attractive software or features, get people interested (so interested that, say, the majority of distros depend on it *wink wink*), and then use that influence to indirectly control where FOSS moves. By striking the weakest part of the stack (sysv probably *did* need a good replacement, but not one as ambitious as systemd) and digging down into the kernel level (kdbus), Red Hat devs will now have a very influential role in the FOSS world. This will in turn generate interest (and thus profit) in Red Hat. It's marginally clever, but so clearly obvious at the same time. It's sad (to me) that the community didn't see it coming. Those who did have been written off as conspiracy theorists or FUDders. Time will reveal all. ~Daniel
