Re: Re: Peter still in misery (was: Jan doesn't want Peter to know (was: Peter wants

On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 11:34:53PM -0500, Peter D. Ward wrote:
> > > What you seem to argue is that Herc is eligible for the following:
> > > 3)  no patent license ====> software license
> > Unless and until IBM says that the lack of any licensing for any alleged
> > patents that Hercules may infringe is the reason for refusing to license
> > their software on Hercules, this is a pretty large leap.
> What then is the reason you surmise for them not offering licenses?
> What explanation is the small leap?

Assuming they do not, indeed, license their software on Hercules (something
for which I still have seen no credible evidence), it is much more likely
that they simply don't have any idea what to charge for it.

> > I firmly believe that, were it not for open source, Hercules would not
> > be where it is today. Lots of folks have contributed lots of good code,
> > including more than a few things that none of the original developers
> > would have come up with. Probably the best example of this is compressed
> > DASD, something no other IBM emulator (and possibly no other emulator
> > for any platform) has. I certainly wouldn't have come up with it.
> It remains that you could have released the code as OCO freeware with the
> offer to share source via closed CVS with anyone presenting an idea for
> improvement.  (Much like MS does with its trusted partners) The effect
> would not have been much different especially once you have your core
> group in place.

I disagree strongly. This might have been true in the early 1990s, before
the rise of Linux, but that rise has drastically changed people's
expectations when it comes to freely available software - especially in the
Linux world. OCO is unacceptable to Linux users, especially - it took a
major change in Red Hat's policies to ship Red Hat for S/390 with an OCO
driver, as they repeatedly refused Compaq's requests to do so - and, had
Hercules been released as OCO, it would have been roundly ignored. The QPL
is about as restrictive a license as you can find and still remain Open
Source Definition compliant, and that choice itself has caused some
controversy.

Had Hercules been released as OCO, that core group would never have been
formed in the first place.

> So I don't see open source as the essential difference per se.  The net's
> knowledge focusing ability is what gives the process its umph, especially
> in projects where the goal is to hit some gold standard such as correct
> implementation of an existing architecture.

The net's ability to spread knowledge of a program and present it to
intersted parties is as important, if not more so. Where do you find people
interested in the subject to the point they're willing to contribute their
time, anyway?

If you haven't, you should read The Cathedral and the Bazaar, Eric Raymond's
seminal essay on the nature of software development in the open source
world. You can find it online at http://tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/ , as the
first entry. (The rest of the stuff there is pretty good, too.) The Hercules
project is deliberately run (for whatever values of "run" apply) to maximize
the benefits of the bazaar model.

> We long ago rejected compressed DASD as unsuitable for our production
> goals.  On developer systems it makes more sense but there are still
> opportunities for trouble with it.

Quite true, and the history of Hercules compressed DASD isn't one of
unalloyed success. OTOH, it's allowed some other things to happen much more
easily; Volker Bandke's turnkey MVS would have been impossible in its
current form without it.

> > It would be interesting to hear what they consider the deficiencies to
> > be, but somehow I don't think that information will be forthcoming.
> It's not their's to say.

Oh, I'm sure they could say something general about the areas they found
lacking in the public documentation without violating any NDAs...and if it's
not theirs to say, as those who found such deficiencies, whose is it?

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get 128 Bit SSL Encryption!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/JjlUgA/vN2EAA/kG8FAA/dpFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
hercules-advocacy-unsubscribe-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/