Re: Open source WO - offer

Hi to everyone!

I am new in this list and new to WO.

Mr. George Tuparev,

I do not really understand your Personal Note. Why do you give WO 30  
% of survival?

I do not understand if you give 30 percent if WO is open sourced or not.

Thank you,

David Sanchez


On Sep 3, 2006, at 4:45 PM, Georg Tuparev wrote:

> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> WebObjects-talk mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/webobjects-talk
>