On Mon, Jun 26, 2000 at 01:18:21PM -0500, Mike Cravens wrote:
> Could you encourage more participation in the porting process by others
> interested in keeping the source open?
>
> If you close the source, I might as well use VxWorks.
I am not closing the source. Please note that there are new GPL releases
of RTLinux on our web site nearly every week. We have a long
track record of delivering GPL code. Longer than anyone else in this
area, by some years.
> Many people are just arriving at the real-time and embedded party.
>
> Getting people to contribute commits them in ways beyond money and economics.
>
> There are some things that die if you hold them too tightly.
Contributed source and ports are great. Please send 'em.
What we've found is that most RTLinux users want to work on their
own apps. RT kernel code is really specialized.
If you look at the credits file sent with RTLinux, you will
see that there are some exceptions -- and I, for one, really appreciate them.
Tomasz, Jerry, and others have been critical. What I have rejected,
and will continue to reject are changes that I think are technically
wrong, poorly done, or violate the base paradigm. An advantage of
open source is that others who disagree are free to pursue their own
path. And if their ideas turn out to be good, we may even change our
minds. A good example of how this works is the Linux fbcon component
that came after a conceptually similar but weak alternate method
was rejected.
> Having source is a security blanket that we can pack our own parachute , if
> need be, but we would rather focus on our areas of expertise as a
> corporation, and get help in other areas.
Of course. The commercial advantage of Linux/Open-Source is exactly
this: the balance of power shifts from the controlling closed source
vendor. Our customers have the advantage of being able to get support
from someone else, or do some work internally, or ...
This means we have to deliver or get replaced, and we don't mind that
bargain at all. However, because customers now have more power, they
have to be careful to think things through and decide on the implications
of choosing one vendor over another. For example, paying a vendor
for a product delivered by Debian, while not putting any money back
into Debian may be a self-defeating strategy.
> You might want to get your investors to read "Under the Radar, by Red Hat's
> Robert Young. The part where he was talking to Intel money people about giving
> away software was both humorous and informative.
When RedHat (or Heinz ketchup!) posts a profit this will be
a more persuasive argument.
I don't want to
overemphasize the difficulties. We are still having a good time here --
and we are breaking even. But even a calm, easygoing, person like myself
can lose his temper now and then. And at ELC, I talked to a potential
investor who asked me precisely this question inspired by talks in which
Debian invented technology was being advertised as proprietary. A
somewhat grumpy, low-sleep email followed. Don't read too much into it.
-- [rtl] ---
To unsubscribe:
echo "unsubscribe rtl" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR
echo "unsubscribe rtl <Your_email>" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
For more information on Real-Time Linux see:
http://www.rtlinux.org/rtlinux/
