Source availability
Posted Jan 6, 2006 16:37 UTC (Fri) by
Duncan (guest, #6647)
In reply to:
Source availability by corbet
Parent article:
The Grumpy Editor's Obviously Incorrect 2006 Predictions
I understand all you've said, and agree to some extent or I wouldn't have
been able to subscribe and continue my subscription to this point.
However, with all due respect, how long has the code been promised? For
comparison, how long has the SCO case been dragging on and on and on?
In the simple case, you wouldn't /have/ to do /all/ the things you list.
Doing some sort of a security audit is of course a very good idea, as
it /is/ after all running your site. However, that's a good idea in /any/
case, as I'm sure you know better than I all the arguments about security
thru obscurity, having (I'm sure) mentioned them many times in your
articles over the years, so it's NOT something that should be directly
related to releasing the site source. Talking about which... one hopes
that at least the code handling the personal info and CC transactions for
the subscriptions is audited. That's MY info you got in there! =8^|
The build-instructions as well would be nice. However, the mailing list
thing and the like aren't absolute necessities. Good thing to have, sure,
but the deal is, once the source is out there, others can use it if
desired, supported or not. Source without support isn't perfect, but if
the lack of support is obstructing the availability of source, the perfect
is the enemy of the good, and that shouldn't be. If you are lucky,
someone might get interested and take up maintainership, easing the burden
of support even for this site on you. If not, the source is at least out
there to be used if someone finds it interesting or useful. Whether they
do or not is then their problem, not yours.
What about something on sourceforge or the like? They make it easy to
setup most of the infrastructure, and then you can simply point a link
from the LWN FAQ there. I'm not technical enough to be a very good coder,
but am a regular on a couple lists already (including the PAN newsreader
user and dev lists, look them up on gmane), with the intent of handling
the mundane questions that get asked and re-asked, answering the simple
stuff, and otherwise doing what I can to coordinate the lists such that
the primary developer has time to do more of that and less replying to
questions on the list. Perhaps the same could happen here? Again, it'd
certainly be better to get someone with more site dev and/or python
qualifications, but whatever. I can commit the time, and python's on my
list to learn already, if it helps. Can you lookup my info to mail me or
would you prefer I mail you (assuming I'd be of help at all)?
Anyway, know that it /does/ bother some of us, that a site that's a
flagship, perhaps /the/ flagship, of the Linux news community, doesn't
consider open code worthwhile enough to have made it available, years
after making the promise. It's a bit of inconsistency and a conflicting
double message, which we wish wasn't the case.
Also know that this inconsistency bothers at least a few of us enough that
it will eventually interfere with continued subscriptions, very
regrettably, as we really /do/ believe in the message LWN otherwise
spreads to the world -- enough to actually back it up with money. (I
don't like to talk about it, but if you saw my budget, you'd see what a
sacrifice... but it's not the money, it's the principles, and it's a
sacrifice well worth it... save for one inconsistency.)
Honestly bothered, because I /do/ care.
Duncan
(
Log in to post comments)