Re: Request for comment -- a better attribution system

Alexander Viro
2001-04-22T17:23:57Z

On Sun, 22 Apr 2001, Eric S. Raymond wrote:

> Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu>:
> > Sigh... Would these broken things, by any chance, be "my grand ideas are
> > not met with applause"?
>
> Nope. Not at all. Stay tuned, because I'll explain.
>
> And before you write me off as one of the $BIGNUM clueless
> visionaries, you might do well to remember that I actually *have*
> radically changed the world lkml operates in. At least twice.

So had certain wa.us-based company. If you refer to your "Cathedral
and Bazaar" - pardon me the bluntness, but it doesn't speak well of your
clue level. L-k is not a place for detailed analysis of that text, so let
me just point to the fact that
* you've ignored the robustness of design behind the UNIX kernel.
These beasts keep going without falling apart even after serious injuries.
* you've ignored another factor - maintainer with a taste and ability
to say "no".
* you've made a completely unwarranted assumption - that widely-used
and available code actually gets reviewed by many people. It's demonstrably
false.

Ability to do PR != having a shred of clue in other areas.
I'm sure that you can come up with relevant examples yourself.