Re: Open source WO - offer

Bruce,

I am afraid we are talking two different things.

I claim that:
1. EOF (and the rest of the WO) is so good, that I still am most  
productive using it, and
2. there are mature products (like cars) that do not need inventions,  
but gradual small improvements and maintenance. After 15 years WO is  
such a product. Additions like Wonder's AJAX framework are nice and  
important, but they are similar to - say, a GPS navigation system -  
and not a new engine architecture.

I did not claim WO should not be maintained by the community. I  
actually do not know what is better, because there are many pros and  
cons. I did in the past participated in similar effort (the NeXT's  
IndexKit) that was complete disaster, and learned many lessons.

The survival of WO depends not on if it is open source or not. If  
there is a bright developer (or small team) with all the skills  
needed (complex set to be discussed here) that sits behind the WO,  
the framework will survive and thrive. If not, well, we need to look  
for replacement. It does not matter if this team is part of Apple or  
not (but because of complex politics I will prefer that they are on  
Apple's payroll). I am afraid the Wonder folks or any other group  
that I know cannot play this role because this effort is not what it  
pays their bills, and therefore they are not 100% committed. This  
does not have anything to do with their talents. If Apple hires the  
same people, this will of course change the story completely.

Also, please do not assume I am writing this because I never thought  
of all these problems. Many years ago I and few friends took GNUstep  
from Paul Kunz and enhanced and maintained it. For few years the  
GNUstep website was running on my HP/Gecko station running OpenStep.  
I was also one of the maintainers of the MiscKit. Exactly these  
experiences are the source of my pessimistic view on opening the  
sources...

<PersonalNote>
I personally give WO 30% chance of survival - long term. Because the  
most important thing for me is productivity, I do not plan to move to  
any of the competitors. What my company is doing, is to work on our  
own product. No, it is not reinventing the wheel. It is not a general  
framework, and it is not Java - but ObjC/Cocoa. And it will be not  
open source. Our software is handling significant percentages of the  
dutch bank transactions, and dutch and UK mobile phone calls, and our  
goal is to keep it going. We might contribute to Wonder our charting  
tool that uses Core Image ... if one day is mature enough.
</PersonalNote>

just my €0.02

g

On Sep 3, 2006, at 9:24 PM, Bruce Fancher wrote:

> So the question isn't: should WebObjects be a proprietary solution  
> that has
> a resonable level of investment in its marketing and development or  
> should
> it be open source?  The question is: should WebObjects be open  
> source or
> should it effectively be dead?

Georg Tuparev
Tuparev Technologies
Klipper 13
1186 VR Amstelveen
The Netherlands
Mobile: +31-6-55798196