Re: Formal Member Registration

[Arun Sharma <adsharma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, May 29, 2000 at 01:57:04AM +0530, Atul Chitnis wrote:
> Finally - the comment of "there is no movement" is silly and (frankly
> speaking) in bad taste, considering the background. If you think that
> Linux is making it big in India solely because of technical prowess (which
> it doesn't lack), you really lost track of things.

You missed the "convenience" part.

> There are hundreds and thousands of people who contribute to this,
> and if this doesn't justify calling it a movement, I wonder what can.

I contribute to an OS, not because of some "movement", but because 
I like doing something and if it can help others, so be it. After 
reading the Linux Journal survey of the first 100 people who contributed
to "Linux" [1], I can say this was true of most of those 100 people too
(the ones who subscribed to Stallmanist view of the world were a clear
minority - but the same can't be said of non programmers)

> This comment is another example of one man's opinion being liberally
> rammed down the throat of the others,

I'm just expressing my opinion. Free speech. No force.

> and I (for one) object to it,

Feel free to. I'll just continue doing this, while sticking to the
rules of the list.

> because it in one one quick rat-a-tat of words deliberately attempts to
> marginalise everything that I (and an overwhelming number of others)  
> feel about Linux and the way it is changing a lot of things around us.

I'm not trying to marginalize anything. Just trying to express my view
as a programmer (which ironically needs highlighting). The other views
being expressed here are those of ISPs, hardware vendors, consultants,
contractors, book vendors, CD vendors, technology samplers, hobbyists,
students, alternative media (a la slashdot, technocrat, advogato) and
so on.

While these people easily outnumber programmers among the linux users
(note that notorious absence of the word community), you have to remember
that programmers _created_ linux and are central to its success or failure.
I'm not saying that other people are marginal or trivial to linux,
but am saying that programmers are special.

I've made my transition as a linux loving CS student to a UNIX kernel
programmer to linux kernel engineer etc and am convinced of the lack of an
economic model in the linux world for serious programmers. 

And if you think again, it's a pretty serious issue, which is not addressed,
often ignored and deliberately marginalized by other competing interests.

For those of you curious, I've moved over to using FreeBSD, because of
my personal beliefs on these issues. I still like parts of Linux
technically [2] - but not the dominant political forces (GNU/GPL)
[3] around it. My webserver still runs it. I like Linus Torvalds as
a person (though I disagree with some of his technical decisions and
operating modes). But I don't like the stuff about the "movement" and the
"community".

Specifically, the relationship between two people who go to, let's say 
"foo conference or trade show" and people attending a LUG meeting is
roughly the same in my book. Adding more colors and weightage to the
relationship makes me think of vested interests (which is perfectly
fine, as long as it is represented so).

To summarize, by all means, have an ILUG, have meetings, talk about
Linux. You can do all that without thinking that you're brothers and
sisters or revolutionary soldiers in the same army. Remember, if the
programmer isn't happy, you get crappy software.

Thank you readers, for your attention.

	-Arun

[1] Defining Linux itself has been a very controversial issue. But I
recall Atul's mails defining linux along the lines of "a concept, rather
than a specific OS", that people get it, when you say "Linux". However,
in reality, the term represents a narrow, and subconciously accepted
view which can be roughly summarized as "all software should be open
source and without restrictions on their use in both original or 
modified forms, irrespective of the amount of effort put into it".

[2] Which is why I continue to read these lists. I say /parts/ of Linux
because, I've found significant areas where Linux is not the best
freely available code in that area.

[3] I've received no personal or professional harm from GNU/GPL for
those of you wondering about it. It's just that I can't reconcile the GNU
philosophy with my actions. Therefore I can not agree with or advocate
the thoughts expressed on gnu.org.