Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

[Berin Loritsch]

Nick Chalko wrote:
> 
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Rich Persaud [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 8:26 PM
>>To: Jakarta General List
>>Subject: re[2]: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???
>>
>>Preferred pain is a known pain with an experience-based cap.
>>
>>New and improved pain may promise an average POI 
>>(Pain-on-Investment) that 
>>is 50% of the familiar pain, but will be assigned a risk profile with 
>>unknown maximum pain.
>>
>>If your previous experience confirms that max(NewPain) <= 
>>max(OldPain), 
>>then go ahead and implement NewPain, but make it look like 
>>OldPain.  If 
>>max(NewPain) turns out to be >> max(OldPain), you're on the 
>>hook.  But you 
>>would have first hand experience to make the call, whereas 
>>your boss (and 
>>definitely his boss) would not (or they wouldn't object in the first 
>>place).
>>
>>One successful implementation of NewPain where max(NewPain) <= 
>>max(OldPain), while delivering promised improvements, will 
>>set a precedent. 
>> But someone has to take the risk.  And it won't be people 
>>twice-removed 
>>from the pain.
>>
>>...  in my (painful) experience.
> 
> 
> 
> Here is the short answer.
> Always say "Boss I think this will take a little refactoring of some code.
> I should be able to reuse the most of the code.  
> I will only change what has to changed, and I will make sure that the
> changes are isolated."
> 
> Then do you whatever it takes, including throwing out ALL THE OLD CODE.
> 
> It's your reputation regardless.  You will not be able to say "My manager
> wouldn't let me do it right"
> They will always say "If you knew it was the wrong approach, you should have
> come to me so we can discuss it with your manager.

Sure I can.  They litterally can't afford change--not even the more painful
way.  I started doing it correctly, but I was instructed to stop.  Can
we say "pointy haired boss?"

BTW, I have a reputation in the company for doing a good job of bringing
order out of chaos.  They just wanted to wallow in chaos.


-- 

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
  deserve neither liberty nor safety."
 - Benjamin Franklin


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

[Berin Loritsch]

Daniel Rall wrote:
> Berin Loritsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> 
>>Pier Fumagalli wrote:
>>
>>>On 8/10/02 1:30 am, "Jon Scott Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>
on 2002/10/7 5:21 PM, "Pier Fumagalli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



>JSPs are the "root of all evil" because HTMLers think to have the power (and
>obligation, after a while) to blatantly destroy your entire container in
>less than 2 minutes of uptime... To that respect, even ASP are better...

It is so nice to hear you say that finally Pier. =)
>>>
>>>I still think that the optimal solution is a true SOC using XML, but
>>>the
>>
>>>world is too stupid to understand that... All everyone wants is a quick and
>>>dirty solution...
>>
>>Even when Quick and Dirty takes longer.  I tried to convince my boss that
>>a certain "customization" required so many fundamental changes that it would
>>be quicker and easier to develop/maintain if we did it right.  He told me
>>that he would never be able to convince the CEO that was the right choice,
>>so the "Quick and Dirty" route was the choice--taking me twice as long to
>>get it done.
> 
> 
> Depending on the situation, my response to something like that is my
> way or the highway.

Funny, that was the tack that my manager gave me... ;P

BTW, I took the highway and I need a job...  (actually they went broke,
but the result is the same).

-- 

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
  deserve neither liberty nor safety."
 - Benjamin Franklin


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

Re: About bug handling survey

[A. Gunes Koru]

On 10 Oct 2002, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:

> On Thu, 2002-10-10 at 10:39, A. Gunes Koru wrote:
> > I am also in this list and I don't see the number of surveys blooming.
> > This is totally an incorrect statement. The e-mails I sent is related to
> > the questions at the very heart of development. So, if they are
> > unsolicited, unrequired, one can easily argue that non of the e-mails is
> > required.
> >
>
> This is a circular argument...  If my smartass remarks on your survey
> are unsolicited, unrequired then one can easily argue that any response
> to your survey ;-)

No. First of all, 95% of the survey questions are about the facts. The
rest are about the people's opinions. Your remarks are not related to the
"major" part of the survey. So, your remarks are not answers to the many
questions. In the comments part of the survey, nobody tried to exercise
any control on how you fill it out, how you answer the questions. You are
free to leave your comments on the survey form. "Nobody told you that any
answer or comment is irrelevant". You are the one who raises such an
issue about the relevancy e-mails. Your point above that this is a
circular argument does not make "any" sense at all.

> smartass remarks

You think so.



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

Re: Bug handling survey - 80:20 rule

[Pier Fumagalli]

"Santiago Gala" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>> You're assuming, of course, that you can't have commercial software that
>> *is* open source :-).  Such models do exist -- so I'm assuming you are
>> primarily talking about closed source commercial software.
> 
> This is a very meaningful distinctions. IMO, the fundamental distinction
> here is that of Open vs Closed, not beer-free vs Commercial, where Open
> means Free-freedom (I don't want to go GPL vs BSD here)

I agree wholeheartedly... We're planning to change our servlet container
because we can't get the sources of the one we're using right now. (No, as
of now I'm not a Tomcat user, and probably not even in the future).

The one we use ATM is good, but comes in "binary only" and had already to
decompile the classes TWO TIMES to figure out why some of our web
applications were failing. No fun.

On the other hand, I don't mind paying for a Servlet container which gives
me full access to the source... I have some problem on "live", if I have the
sources, I can check it out and try to fix it... Having the sources is also
beneficial if I want to have a support contract with my container: if I see
a bug, they can tell me to modify and recompile the sources, apply some
patches, we can work together to solve it, instead of being a blind process
of receiving a "jar" file and putting it live...

Pier


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

Re: About bug handling survey

[Andrew C. Oliver]

On Thu, 2002-10-10 at 10:39, A. Gunes Koru wrote:
> 
> Dear Andy,
> 
> First of all, I would prefer to discuss these matters individually not on 
> the list. However, because you are sending e-mails to the list I need to 
> write it to the list too.
> 

Then you might have taken my smartassed remarks personally... oh wait..
;-)

> I am also in this list and I don't see the number of surveys blooming.  
> This is totally an incorrect statement. The e-mails I sent is related to
> the questions at the very heart of development. So, if they are
> unsolicited, unrequired, one can easily argue that non of the e-mails is
> required.
> 

This is a circular argument...  If my smartass remarks on your survey
are unsolicited, unrequired then one can easily argue that any response
to your survey ;-)

> Regarding to the second part of e-mail, I think everybody in this list is
> clever enough to see you are just trying to place some definitions or
> labels. I am 30 years old I think I have been in many projects, which
> allow me to talk about what I know precisely. There are people doing their
> Ph.D. in their 40s and 50s. So, would you call them kids too? You only
> judge or identify yourself with what you say. You can not identify
> others. I think, any person who gained true mastery in a field would not
> feel this need to do it anyways. 
> 

It was a generalization based on the last few of these surveys I've
gotten.  There are always exceptions.


> Let people decide. I have been received over 110 answers. Let me ask you
> this. If there are people in this project interested in what I am writing,
> how can you feel comfortable trying to put down this communication. Do
> you think your friends do not have the ability to distinguish what is 
> useful, what is relevant, what is not?
> 

Because its was my opinion.  I've never gained any really useful
information out of surveys, most especially on software development.


> As I conclude, I should say that I am truly inspired with what I am doing 
> and would like to remind this
 
To each their own.  If Surveys inspire you...go for it.  If making
smartass remarks about how many surveys I get in a day inspires
me...well I'll go for it ;-)

You know what I hate most about surveys?  Trying to characterize my
answers into one of the choices.  I am that dot you throw out because it
falls outside of the acceptable range of deviation ;-)

> "I might disagree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death 
> your right to say it." 
> Voltaire
>

exactly ;-) 

-Andy

> To everybody, if the things I write in my e-mails make sense, please
> visit:
> 
> http://www.seas.smu.edu/~gkoru/surveys/dhsurvey.html
> 
> and fill out my survey, if you haven't done yet.
> 
> Regards
> 
> A. Gunes Koru
> http://www.seas.smu.edu/~gkoru
> 
> ===
> >I answered the first two or three of these that was sent to me (student
> >studies)...  But they seem to be blooming rapidly.  One could
> >hypothesize through the use of some kind of mathematical model that 
> >if one continues to participate they will increase exponentially and
> >eventually one will answer surveys with all of the time they would spend
> >actually participating in open source software projects.
> >
> >We should round these kids up and get them to maybe create a student
> >survey information site.  They could do it as their own opensource
> >project and then collect the data they need from themselves ;-)
> >
> >-Andy
> =
> On Wed, 2002-10-09 at 10:38, Gunes Koru wrote:
> > 
> > Hello Jakarta contributors,
> > 
> > I am conducting a survey about the way bugs are handled in open source
> > software projects. The survey includes questions that can be answered by
> > developers,testers, bug fixers, project managers, and owners of defect
> > databases. It is only and only for research purposes and it is very easy
> > to fill out. It consists of three short sections which can be completed 
> at
> > once or in different sessions. Please fill it out if you haven't done 
> yet.
> > You will find the questions interesting since there is a reason behind
> > each one one of them. They will make you think about how things work (or
> > could work)in your project. The survey can be found in the address:
> > 
> > http://www.seas.smu.edu/~gkoru/surveys/dhsurvey.html
> > 
> > The data in the bug databases can be used to identify the high risk 
> areas
> > in the software development. One of the ways of doing it is constructing
> > tree-based models, which could be very useful in open source projects. 
> If
> > you would like to read about it, I prepared a web page for you:
> > 
> > http://www.seas.smu.edu/~gkoru/surveys/tbdm1.html
> > 
> > Please accept my apologies if you receive duplicates of this e-mail. 
> This
> > is a survey, which will give useful results for all of us. I will try to
> > prepare and make some preliminary r

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

[Andrew C. Oliver]

Just goes to show you.  A sad comment on software development:  The only
thing worse than our still crappy tools for doing things are our crappy
methods of doing them.

-Andy

On Thu, 2002-10-10 at 10:38, Steve Downey wrote:
> >From Scott Adams
> Wally: I recommedend we build a tracking database.
> Dilbert: We could put it on the network!
> PHB: Wouldn't you like to know what the problem is first?
> Dilbert: We like databases.
> 
> Databases get used in lots of wrongheaded ways. No argument. 
> But OO people tend to fall into the other trap, treating the database as a 
> 'persistance mechanism'. Then ending up with tons of objects with no behavior 
> other than being able to persist and reify themselves from a datastore. And 
> blaming the database because it's not great at that. 
> 
> On Thursday 10 October 2002 08:00 am, Tom Copeland wrote:
> > Since we're OT already, I have to interject a good Jamie Zawinski
> > database quote:
> >
> > ===
> > It was a hard sell, since he's a database person, and as far as I've
> > seen, once those database worms eat into your brain, it's hard to ever
> > get anything practical done again. To a database person, every nail
> > looks like a thumb. Or something like that.
> > ===
> >
> > tom
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Steve Downey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 8:52 PM
> > To: Jakarta General List
> > Subject: Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???
> >
> > On Wednesday 09 October 2002 07:18 pm, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> > > On 9/10/02 3:47, "Berin Loritsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Even when Quick and Dirty takes longer.  I tried to convince my boss
> >
> > that
> >
> > > > a certain "customization" required so many fundamental changes that
> >
> > it
> >
> > > > would be quicker and easier to develop/maintain if we did it right.
> >
> > He
> >
> > > > told me that he would never be able to convince the CEO that was the
> > > > right choice, so the "Quick and Dirty" route was the choice--taking
> >
> > me
> >
> > > > twice as long to get it done.
> > >
> > > I got out of the same tie today, but I won! :-) And it was about
> >
> > Objects in
> >
> > > PL-SQL... That was a close one! :-)
> >
> > Objects in PL-SQL.
> >
> > I still have nightmares.
> >
> > SQLJ and Oracle's Object extensions were so seductive.
> >
> > 
> >
> > And I'm in the camp that thinks the ad going around with the
> > snail/cheetah <=>
> > Relational/Object just shows that most OO developers are ignorant
> > regarding
> > the relational model.
> >
> > > Pier
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
> 
-- 
http://www.superlinksoftware.com - software solutions for business
http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound Document in
Java
http://krysalis.sourceforge.net/centipede - the best build/project
structure
a guy/gal could have! - Make Ant simple on complex Projects!
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

About bug handling survey

[A. Gunes Koru]

Dear Andy,

First of all, I would prefer to discuss these matters individually not on 
the list. However, because you are sending e-mails to the list I need to 
write it to the list too.

I am also in this list and I don't see the number of surveys blooming.  
This is totally an incorrect statement. The e-mails I sent is related to
the questions at the very heart of development. So, if they are
unsolicited, unrequired, one can easily argue that non of the e-mails is
required.

Regarding to the second part of e-mail, I think everybody in this list is
clever enough to see you are just trying to place some definitions or
labels. I am 30 years old I think I have been in many projects, which
allow me to talk about what I know precisely. There are people doing their
Ph.D. in their 40s and 50s. So, would you call them kids too? You only
judge or identify yourself with what you say. You can not identify
others. I think, any person who gained true mastery in a field would not
feel this need to do it anyways. 

Let people decide. I have been received over 110 answers. Let me ask you
this. If there are people in this project interested in what I am writing,
how can you feel comfortable trying to put down this communication. Do
you think your friends do not have the ability to distinguish what is 
useful, what is relevant, what is not?

As I conclude, I should say that I am truly inspired with what I am doing 
and would like to remind this

"I might disagree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death 
your right to say it." 
Voltaire

To everybody, if the things I write in my e-mails make sense, please
visit:

http://www.seas.smu.edu/~gkoru/surveys/dhsurvey.html

and fill out my survey, if you haven't done yet.

Regards

A. Gunes Koru
http://www.seas.smu.edu/~gkoru

===
>I answered the first two or three of these that was sent to me (student
>studies)...  But they seem to be blooming rapidly.  One could
>hypothesize through the use of some kind of mathematical model that 
>if one continues to participate they will increase exponentially and
>eventually one will answer surveys with all of the time they would spend
>actually participating in open source software projects.
>
>We should round these kids up and get them to maybe create a student
>survey information site.  They could do it as their own opensource
>project and then collect the data they need from themselves ;-)
>
>-Andy
=
On Wed, 2002-10-09 at 10:38, Gunes Koru wrote:
> 
> Hello Jakarta contributors,
> 
> I am conducting a survey about the way bugs are handled in open source
> software projects. The survey includes questions that can be answered by
> developers,testers, bug fixers, project managers, and owners of defect
> databases. It is only and only for research purposes and it is very easy
> to fill out. It consists of three short sections which can be completed 
at
> once or in different sessions. Please fill it out if you haven't done 
yet.
> You will find the questions interesting since there is a reason behind
> each one one of them. They will make you think about how things work (or
> could work)in your project. The survey can be found in the address:
> 
> http://www.seas.smu.edu/~gkoru/surveys/dhsurvey.html
> 
> The data in the bug databases can be used to identify the high risk 
areas
> in the software development. One of the ways of doing it is constructing
> tree-based models, which could be very useful in open source projects. 
If
> you would like to read about it, I prepared a web page for you:
> 
> http://www.seas.smu.edu/~gkoru/surveys/tbdm1.html
> 
> Please accept my apologies if you receive duplicates of this e-mail. 
This
> is a survey, which will give useful results for all of us. I will try to
> prepare and make some preliminary results on-line within the next two
> weeks. Since this is a survey, covering many important open source
> projects, it will be interesting for everybody to see what kind of 
quality
> assurance work is going on in the other projects. As always, we are very
> dedicated to this research. Please contact me for any question you might
> have.
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> A. Gunes Koru
> http://www.engr.smu.edu/~gkoru
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   

> For additional commands, e-mail: 

> 
-- 
http://www.superlinksoftware.com - software solutions for business
http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound Document in
Java    
http://krysalis.sourceforge.net/centipede - the best build/project
structure
    a guy/gal could have! - Make Ant simple on complex 
Projects!
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote.
-Ambassador Kosh


--




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

[Steve Downey]

From Scott Adams
Wally: I recommedend we build a tracking database.
Dilbert: We could put it on the network!
PHB: Wouldn't you like to know what the problem is first?
Dilbert: We like databases.

Databases get used in lots of wrongheaded ways. No argument. 
But OO people tend to fall into the other trap, treating the database as a 
'persistance mechanism'. Then ending up with tons of objects with no behavior 
other than being able to persist and reify themselves from a datastore. And 
blaming the database because it's not great at that. 

On Thursday 10 October 2002 08:00 am, Tom Copeland wrote:
> Since we're OT already, I have to interject a good Jamie Zawinski
> database quote:
>
> ===
> It was a hard sell, since he's a database person, and as far as I've
> seen, once those database worms eat into your brain, it's hard to ever
> get anything practical done again. To a database person, every nail
> looks like a thumb. Or something like that.
> ===
>
> tom
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Downey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 8:52 PM
> To: Jakarta General List
> Subject: Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???
>
> On Wednesday 09 October 2002 07:18 pm, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> > On 9/10/02 3:47, "Berin Loritsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Even when Quick and Dirty takes longer.  I tried to convince my boss
>
> that
>
> > > a certain "customization" required so many fundamental changes that
>
> it
>
> > > would be quicker and easier to develop/maintain if we did it right.
>
> He
>
> > > told me that he would never be able to convince the CEO that was the
> > > right choice, so the "Quick and Dirty" route was the choice--taking
>
> me
>
> > > twice as long to get it done.
> >
> > I got out of the same tie today, but I won! :-) And it was about
>
> Objects in
>
> > PL-SQL... That was a close one! :-)
>
> Objects in PL-SQL.
>
> I still have nightmares.
>
> SQLJ and Oracle's Object extensions were so seductive.
>
> 
>
> And I'm in the camp that thinks the ad going around with the
> snail/cheetah <=>
> Relational/Object just shows that most OO developers are ignorant
> regarding
> the relational model.
>
> > Pier


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

RE: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???

[Tom Copeland]

Since we're OT already, I have to interject a good Jamie Zawinski
database quote:

===
It was a hard sell, since he's a database person, and as far as I've
seen, once those database worms eat into your brain, it's hard to ever
get anything practical done again. To a database person, every nail
looks like a thumb. Or something like that. 
===

tom


-Original Message-
From: Steve Downey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 8:52 PM
To: Jakarta General List
Subject: Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???


On Wednesday 09 October 2002 07:18 pm, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> On 9/10/02 3:47, "Berin Loritsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Even when Quick and Dirty takes longer.  I tried to convince my boss
that
> > a certain "customization" required so many fundamental changes that
it
> > would be quicker and easier to develop/maintain if we did it right.
He
> > told me that he would never be able to convince the CEO that was the
> > right choice, so the "Quick and Dirty" route was the choice--taking
me
> > twice as long to get it done.
>
> I got out of the same tie today, but I won! :-) And it was about
Objects in
> PL-SQL... That was a close one! :-)
>
Objects in PL-SQL. 

I still have nightmares. 

SQLJ and Oracle's Object extensions were so seductive. 



And I'm in the camp that thinks the ad going around with the
snail/cheetah <=> 
Relational/Object just shows that most OO developers are ignorant
regarding 
the relational model.

> Pier


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:

For additional commands, e-mail:





--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

Re: Bug handling survey - 80:20 rule

[Santiago Gala]

Craig R. McClanahan wrote:

>On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Danny Angus wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 17:45:48 +0100
>>From: Danny Angus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Reply-To: Jakarta General List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: Jakarta General List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Subject: RE: Bug handling survey - 80:20 rule
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>So, how come the
>>>commercial software can still compete with open source products.
>>>  
>>>
>
>You're assuming, of course, that you can't have commercial software that
>*is* open source :-).  Such models do exist -- so I'm assuming you are
>primarily talking about closed source commercial software.
>  
>

This is a very meaningful distinctions. IMO, the fundamental distinction 
here is that of Open vs Closed, not beer-free vs Commercial, where Open 
means Free-freedom (I don't want to go GPL vs BSD here)

>  
>
>>IMHO its because on the whole OpenSource contributors are not doing it
>>to compete with commercial software, in fact many of us do this to
>>provide an alternative to the daily pressures, restrictive working
>>practices and profit driven project management of commercial IT.
>>
>>
>
>Having been (and still am) sitting on both sides of this fence, there is
>quite a bit of truth to this observation.
>
>  
>
>>We're either much less interested in producing a competitor for a
>>commercial product than producing an intelligent, elegant and efficient
>>solution to a particular problem, or we're here to collaborate on a
>>product to use in our own commercial interests, not in competing in the
>>market place.
>>
>>
>>
Commenting on Danny's sentence, you need to make a difference between 
"We" as in each one of us, and "We" as in the community.

Even when each individual developer is interested in "producing an 
intelligent, elegant and efficient solution to a particular problem", 
the community can still produce "a competitor for a commercial product" :-)

There are a lot of colective behaviours going on here, enabled by the 
efficient communication means we are using, which completely make the 
difference. Knowing how to ride this wave is definitely part of the fun.

>I don't think you can generalize to *all* open source projects not being
>interested in competing with commercial packages, but this attitude is
>certainly common.
>
>IMHO, there are at least three major factors that means commercial
>software isn't going to go away any time soon, no matter what happens in
>the open source community:
>
>* SCHEDULE - we all know the standard (and usually pretty sarcastic)
>  response that we open source developers give to the "when's the next
>  version going to be released".  But this is a very very important
>  issue for people who are planning projects that depend on that next
>  release being completed.  Yes, commercial software vendors sometimes
>  miss their dates too, but at least they generally try to meet a
>  predicatable schedule that can be communicated to customers.
>  
>
In my view, this means that succesful OS Product Manager will have lo 
learn to predict fairly accurately the response rate of the community 
for a given situation, and deliver the right expectations to customers.

>* CUSTOMER FOCUS - like any product, commercial software must meet the
>  needs of customers in order to be viable.  While there are certainly
>  open source projects that try to do this, I'd bet that commercial
>  software vendors are perceived as being more responsive in this regard
>  generally -- it's their whole livelihood at stake, versus an open
>  source project that is being done for fun or to collaborate on something
>  interesting.
>  
>
In my view, this means that succesful OS Product Managers will have to 
learn to influence (with "brute force" money, persuasion or other means) 
the community to guide efforts in the required direction.

>* SERVICE/SUPPORT - While it is a myth that you can't get support for
>  widely popular open source projects (check out the Resources pages
>  for something as small as Struts, for example), it is *definitely*
>  true for less popular projects, or projects where the developer
>  community is fairly limited.
>  
>
In my view, this means that succesful OS Product Managers will have to 
learn to organize support networks for their products in different ways 
as in CS Product Companies.

>Individual open source projects can clearly choose to deal with the
>objective realities in each of these three areas, and the ones that do
>have no problem competing with commercial closed source software.  But the
>general perceptions in these areas about the open source community, as a
>whole, are fairly accurate IMHO.
>
>On the other hand, the real world is also getting more complex in this
>regard, with companies choosing to build commercial products that are
>partially or (almost) completely constructed with open source software --
>licenses like the Apache Software Foundation license make this trivially
>simple.
>  
>
I have some experience regarding