On Fri, May 8, 2015 07:59, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Sorin Srbu wrote:
Yeah, well, but it's free. I'm not sure you can complain too much in that case. 8-)
I find this comment, often made, completely unacceptable. The implication is that inferior code is OK if the developer is not being paid.
(Actually, the premise is probably nonsense, as most Linux developers _are_ paid, even if formally their pay is not specifically for Linux development. But presumably the company that pays them believes that it is of value to the company to have a Linux developer on board.)
But is Linux code in fact inferior to code produced by Microsoft, say? I don't think so. And I don't think Linux developers are less keen to improve their code. Just the opposite.
The difference is that a large portion of the FOSS corpus, if not a preponderant majority, is ultimately dependent upon the interest of the people responsible for its existance and not the people using it. Once a project's core team either loses enthusiasm for something, or have otherwise moved on in life, their project oft-times is left without any meaningful support.
If a project is backed/picked up by a corporation, say Redhat or Oracle, or a foundation, say Apache or LibreOffice, then it may have a future more or less independent of any single individual or group. Otherwise it does not.