Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 20 Mar 2000 16:54:37 -0500 | From | Dave_Pfaltzgraff@patapsco ... | Subject | Re: 2.3.51 tulip broken |
| |
Dave Pfaltzgraff@PATAPSCO 03/20/2000 04:54 PM
Until now, I was a curious bystander to this thread, but now I feel compelled to put in my two cents. Acknowledging that some may feel that two cents is not much value these days, I still feel that there is significance in what I have to say. Unfortunately, I know of no other podium where those who may benefit the most may be listening. Please hear me out.
This thread has often drawn the analogy to Eric's "The Cathedral and the Bazaar". If you have ever experienced the true bazaar environment, you come away feeling that everything is chaotic and it's a wonder anything ever gets done. This is contrasted with the cathedral where it seems that order reigns to the detriment of progress. Admittedly, this focuses on the two extremes. However, there are many variations in between that work well and it would seem that most companies are somewhere in between on the spectrum. Linux is maturing and a part of the growth process is to re-evaluate where we've been, where we are now and where we are headed. It also gives us the chance to re-evaluate where we want to be in this operational spectrum.
From my viewpoint, I would like to see Linux continue on the path of being a full featured and reliable operating system. (This contrasts with those who think it should be a 'David' to Microsoft's 'giant'.) In order to be both full featured and reliable, the Linux community must continue to draw on an ever increasing base of developers. This places more demands on the current developers and emphasizes the need for better communications. (I'll come back to this shortly.)
In contrast to my viewpoint, there is another group that would like to see Linux support all of the 'latest and greatest'. Whether that's hardware or software technology, it doesn't matter. This group emphasizes the speed of development. (Just look at the pressure to release 2.4 by some arbitrary date! Was that pressure put there by some imaginary 'competitor'?) I hate to say it, but this environment emphasizes what has been called the 'cowboy' development - act now, talk about it (document) later. Yes, there's room and actually a need for this type of environment, but to anyone not directly involved, the feeling is one of complete chaos - the bazaar. Also, 'document later' has the effect of encouraging important details to get lost in the shuffle.
Having been a student of computer technology (for several decades), I have learned the need for clearly defined interfaces. This is true whether you're speaking of hardware, software, user interfaces or almost any place where you can draw a line between levels of interaction and/or responsibility. Not knowing the inner workings of the Linux kernel at this point, I have to raise the question, as some others have in this thread, as to why the network is integrated into the kernel to the degree implied by those who are crying that the Tulip driver is broken. I can compile a kernel without a network and have done it many times for embedded systems. This confirms my feeling that the network is an interface supported by the kernel and not necessarily an integral part it. (Sort of reminds me of Microsoft and the integrated browser arguments!)
Back to the topic of the need for better communications... It would appear to me that the group of developers working on the kernel should unambiguously define an interface and allow development efforts to proceed in parallel. If there is to be change in that interface, then both parties must agree to it. In any development, it is extremely important for all participants to 'buy into' the design. From what I have read here, it would appear to me that this has not been the case. Under these circumstances, it's only natural that finger pointing should begin and I'll admit to having been amused by some of what has been said on both sides.
What I'd like to say now is merely: Come on guys (and gals, as the case may be)! Let's grow up and accept responsibility for what has happened and for what's going on now. This kind of rift is exactly what will destroy the momentum of Linux. Momentum is not measured by release numbers or rates. It's measured by the size of the community involved with Linux - both developers and users. Let us all acknowledge that our present development course is on the verge of floundering and ask if there is some thing that we can do to get over this and get moving together again. (It's my sincere hope that the rift is not irreparable.) Along with this, let us acknowledge that for some the bazaar environment is exactly what they need while for others the cathedral environment works better. Let's discuss not who needs to do what to which module, but how are we going to move together into a more open (accepting) manner that will benefit us all. This is a community of developers willing to donate their time and efforts. In this environment, coercion will not work. Only cooperation will produce results.
With the best of intentions and hopes for the future, Dave
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |