Re[2]: Cygwin participation threshold

[Paul Sokolovsky <paul-ml@is.lg.ua>]

Hello Steve,

Steve Morris <smorris@nexen.com> wrote:

SM> Christopher Faylor writes:
 >> It is interesting that you felt this way at first.  I wonder if the reason
 >> has anything to do with the name "Cygwin" which sounds so similar to "Cygnus".
 >> 
 >> The reason I am saying this is because hundreds of people have contributed to
 >> the linux project and *many* companies make money from linux.

SM> Actually I think you've hit on a major issue. Even though Cygnus makes
SM> cygwin available as sourceware it is obviously a Cygnus
SM> product. Cygnus controls the feature set. Design decisions are made by
SM> Cygnus. People can contribute but Cygnus is the final arbitor on
SM> design decisions and even code style.

    As far all messages in this thread were concerned with money and
company status. There're however other attitudes may exist not
concerned with that things. They hardly make great slice in overall
pie, but they may be interesting and completing picture. I write
something like that to DJ Delorie because I hoped that thread will
die. I however, will risk uttering it here. In maxims. Sorry.

1. Here, at my place, nor me nor other people cannot decide which
system they will use: we condemned to use M$ .
2. I personally like anything which allows me to fool this fate (the
motto is: "They can make us use their crap, but they cannot make us
use it their way - we anyway will use it normal way ;-E")
3. I'm just student and appreciate any system allowing me experience
things from which I am departed due (1).
4. I come at little misfeatures, which I probably fix and would like
other guys who just (3) or something like that never come again at.
5. Such things as Linux show that something rightly designed from
scratch can really be right. Question interesting me if is something
inherently weird and evil like windoze can be cured into normal state.
6. Ultimate motto is: "Operating systems considered harmful". OSes stand
in our way. They must be destroyed. Anything helping this worth
appreciating.

      All this makes me wanting to make contributions. What is largely
disallows me it (besides being nothing but bag of crazy ambitions, of
course) is pure technological matters: it's too hard to get that
threshold to make it effectively. Time I need to get it, I can spend
doing something else, e.g. reenventing it all ;-) And, as I told
before, that's not Cygwin problem - IMHO, that's GNU problem - their
style of writing programs is somewhat ... not as in other places %)

      Hopefully, all this is rambling of single freak. But at last I
remind that there're really some problems GNU facing of kind very
familiar to which I talk about. Remember Richy Stallman's sulking at
Linux community for not calling itself "GNU Linux community"? Whether
Linux people was so ungrateful to admit using GNU tools? Somewhere I
read following explaination: Linux is not all that stuff sitting on
system, which is _of course_ GNU, Linux is kernel, which has far
relation with GNU (in code style too, I must note), made by some guy
who has quite careless attitude towards existing things like FreeBSD,
Minix, HURD, etc., just wanting to make 'something weird'.

       All this is exaggeration.



Best regards,
 Paul                            mailto:paul-ml@is.lg.ua


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com