Public Domain Python

[Grant Edwards]

In article <39C1D17A.13030BE at seebelow.org>, Grant Griffin wrote:
>Grant Edwards wrote:
>> 
>...
>> I've been doing real-time embedded software for 15+ years, and I just
>> finished my first project using 100% open-source development tools.  My
>> experience is that open source tools completely outclass commercial tools in
>> every respect.  Better tools, better service, better documentation.
>
>Evidently you've never tried to run CygWin on Windows. <wink>

Well, I live in Unix-land, but I just spent about two weeks
setting up a complete Cygwin/gcc/gdb-insight/eCos development
environment for ARM7 embedded work under NT for another
division to use (complete with printed manuals for everything
and a CD that almost installs itself).  I was quite impressed
with my work.  The day after I shipped the whole thing (along
with two prototype platforms) management decided that they
wanted that division to do WinCE on StrongARM instead.  Aaargh.

It was a bit of a hassle compared to running the stuff under
Unix.

>If you live in the Unix world, I don't doubt what you say, but
>my experience running GNU software overall on Windows has been
>extremely poor.  The reason for this is neatly explained at
>http://www.boswa.com/buskware/buskware.html:
>
>"Free Software is a nice idea, once you get past all the
>silliness about it being a moral imperative. Everyone wants
>better software, and we programmers want a look at the code.
>However, following the practices of Free Software puts software
>production out on an island, isolated from the rest of the
>economy. Software is produced for the producers, and the users
>have nothing to contribute and no control (unless they are also
>software producers).  Any consideration of the end users is an
>act of pure charity."

Exactly -- open source works best for things where the users
and the producers are the same group.

>Users of Windows currently are the largest single category of
>software users, yet "free software" (in the GNU sense) does not
>cater to them whatesover.  Why?  Because "free software" (in
>the GNU sense) is written for producers, and those producers
>mostly use some form of Unix.

It also means that Unix users who have a different set of tasks
to perform than the open-source-producers don't get any
open-source tools for those tasks.  Open source will always be
strongest in the areas that interest programmers (e.g.
languages: lots and lots of different language
implimentations).

Things that programmers don't find interesting or don't need to
do aren't going to get open-source tools for them, unless
somebody with money decides to fund the project for whatever
reason (e.g. Sun and StarOffice -- not to start a discussion of
whether StarOffice is really "open" or not).

In the linux newsgroups at any point in time there are several
threads going on like this:

     NewUser:  Why isn't there an application for X?
     
LinuxHackers:  We don't to need to do X.

     NewUser:  But I do need to do X, and I have to run Windows
               to do it.
  
LinuxHackers:  Then write an application to do X.  Nobody's
               stopping you.
               
     NewUser:  I don't know how to program.
     
LinuxHackers:  You should learn, then write the application
               you want.
               
     NewUser:  I don't want to write programs, I just want to
               use them.
               
LinuxHackers:  Then go back to Windows.

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow!  My mind is making
                                  at               ashtrays in Dayton...
                               visi.com