P
Phil Covington
Curt:
While I am sure my last post will not earn me any points for tactfulness, your dismissal of Hugh Jack's excellent code based on programming language really yanked my chain I am sorry to say.
Curt Wuollet wrote:
>Hi all
>
>So much for the olive branch........ Still hate to see you go, Phil. As I said
>when you went over to the NT side, I'm not out to exclude anyone.
Went over to the NT side??? Don't you mean "went over to the dark side"?
I have the opportunity to do some development work on a soft plc, and it happens that it must run on NT. I do plan on releasing the source under a BSD License or GPL though. Most of the code *will* be portable and if it turns out well I will port it to Linux as time permits. That I am developing it for a MS product is what gives you heartburn I suspect...
There are __many__ people using NT that we cannot ignore. Consider this: If a open source soft plc project on NT attracts people because of its
openness and there is also an equivalent effort in Linux, then there is an opportunity to
'convert' people to your beloved Linux OS.
Let me state now that I am definitely not a fan of Bill Gates or Microsoft. I began using Linux in 1997 because of my dissatisfaction with Windows. I have very positive experiences with W2K though, and I have begun to rethink my position on MS and Windows. With W2K and Linux I have the best of both worlds and it doesn't require me to exclude either OS. I am very impressed with the Linux kernel (have you ever actually sat down and gone through it?), but
IMHO, I think that the X Window system and many of the apps still leave a lot to be desired. Of
course, X Window and the apps are not really _Linux_ are they?
I am turned off by both Windows and Linux zealots and their all-or-nothing views. I use software as a tool to get a job done and as long as it works, I am happy.
>It's
>got to be a community effort. I agree that it's a good approach and well
>crafted. And it's more than anyone has contributed to date And as I also
>said, it's for the listers to decide and I will yield to democracy. I'm
not
>going to debate good and evil with you Phil.
Where did I mention good or evil in my last post? You are the one that seems to want
to make your OS choice and the open source movement an issue of morality and ethics...
Just re-read your response to my message a while back when I said that I was going to concentrate on NT right now. I believe you used the words "moral" and "ethical"...
>I do feel quite strongly that we need to include as many people as possible
>in a community project. I also believe that to keep it from being
exploited,
>we need the GPL. I also believe that Linux and the free GNU tools make
>it possible for anyone from a poor student to a company president to
>participate and deploy the result on an equal basis with equal ownership.
>I'm not sure how you construe that as elitist, that remark actually hurt.
All one has to do is read your past messages in the Automation List concerning open source vs proprietary or your feelings towards Microsoft to come to that conclusion. Somehow you feel that open source is more ethical and that proprietary
is evil. MS users are just mindless lemmings or clueless and your choice in an OS is somehow enlightened and "right"...
I applaud those who release their software projects as open source, but I do not condemn or think less of those who keep their products proprietary.
>I am a Linux bigot, that has a lot to do with the principles above and a
>deep appreciation for the countless developers who literally give their
>lifes work so that I can afford to run a world class OS with world class
>tools, I owe much of what I know and how I make my living to people
>who share knowlege and information freely. This project is an attempt
>to meet that standard and pass on the only advantage that I have been
>given. If that sounds silly and idealistic and makes this a pipedream, so
>be it. RMS and I don't see eye to eye either, but, I respect his point of
>view. This is perhaps the most adverse, commercialized environment
>to attempt a community effort in and I expected some unpleasantness.
And no more unpleasant than many of the open source/ Linux advocates that can't get over the fact that the world does not bend to their idealistic wishes.
Their endless criticism and rhetoric does as much to turn off people to the idea of open source projects as it does to open peoples minds to the open source idea.
>If there is to be no community around it and the principles don't mean
>anything, it would be simpler and faster to pass the hat and pay some
>CS mercenaries to do it. Then how they did it could be kept secret and
>sold for what the market would bear. It would run on proprietary and
>expensive hardware and use yet another proprietary fieldbus etc. and
>nothing would change.
Not everyone has a deep seated disdain for proprietary solutions as you seem to have though...
Do you seriously think that Allen Bradley, Siemens, or whomever is going to give up and wither away just because there is an open source alternative available? Many companies like the support that they get from these proprietary
vendors and they are willing to pay the price that comes with sticking to a proprietary solution. I personally don't like having to pay big bucks for a fieldbus card when ethernet would be a much less expensive solution, but what I
personally think doesn't really matter when it comes right down to it. I can give my customers options (which would include an open source solution) but they will ultimately make the decision and I will smile and accept it. That is if I do want to keep them as a customer...
>I started to code the thing all by myself, but I
>thought and still think it would be better and mean a lot more if it were
>a community project. If I have become an obstacle to that, it's I who
>should leave. Listers, it's _your_ community and _your_ project, what
>do you think?
I think that if you continue to reject the efforts of people willing to contribute
to this project (such as Hugh Jack) then I don't think you will need worry about it. You will be the only one left here...
Regards,
Phil
_______________________________________________
LinuxPLC mailing list
[email protected]
http://linuxplc.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxplc
While I am sure my last post will not earn me any points for tactfulness, your dismissal of Hugh Jack's excellent code based on programming language really yanked my chain I am sorry to say.
Curt Wuollet wrote:
>Hi all
>
>So much for the olive branch........ Still hate to see you go, Phil. As I said
>when you went over to the NT side, I'm not out to exclude anyone.
Went over to the NT side??? Don't you mean "went over to the dark side"?
I have the opportunity to do some development work on a soft plc, and it happens that it must run on NT. I do plan on releasing the source under a BSD License or GPL though. Most of the code *will* be portable and if it turns out well I will port it to Linux as time permits. That I am developing it for a MS product is what gives you heartburn I suspect...
There are __many__ people using NT that we cannot ignore. Consider this: If a open source soft plc project on NT attracts people because of its
openness and there is also an equivalent effort in Linux, then there is an opportunity to
'convert' people to your beloved Linux OS.
Let me state now that I am definitely not a fan of Bill Gates or Microsoft. I began using Linux in 1997 because of my dissatisfaction with Windows. I have very positive experiences with W2K though, and I have begun to rethink my position on MS and Windows. With W2K and Linux I have the best of both worlds and it doesn't require me to exclude either OS. I am very impressed with the Linux kernel (have you ever actually sat down and gone through it?), but
IMHO, I think that the X Window system and many of the apps still leave a lot to be desired. Of
course, X Window and the apps are not really _Linux_ are they?
I am turned off by both Windows and Linux zealots and their all-or-nothing views. I use software as a tool to get a job done and as long as it works, I am happy.
>It's
>got to be a community effort. I agree that it's a good approach and well
>crafted. And it's more than anyone has contributed to date And as I also
>said, it's for the listers to decide and I will yield to democracy. I'm
not
>going to debate good and evil with you Phil.
Where did I mention good or evil in my last post? You are the one that seems to want
to make your OS choice and the open source movement an issue of morality and ethics...
Just re-read your response to my message a while back when I said that I was going to concentrate on NT right now. I believe you used the words "moral" and "ethical"...
>I do feel quite strongly that we need to include as many people as possible
>in a community project. I also believe that to keep it from being
exploited,
>we need the GPL. I also believe that Linux and the free GNU tools make
>it possible for anyone from a poor student to a company president to
>participate and deploy the result on an equal basis with equal ownership.
>I'm not sure how you construe that as elitist, that remark actually hurt.
All one has to do is read your past messages in the Automation List concerning open source vs proprietary or your feelings towards Microsoft to come to that conclusion. Somehow you feel that open source is more ethical and that proprietary
is evil. MS users are just mindless lemmings or clueless and your choice in an OS is somehow enlightened and "right"...
I applaud those who release their software projects as open source, but I do not condemn or think less of those who keep their products proprietary.
>I am a Linux bigot, that has a lot to do with the principles above and a
>deep appreciation for the countless developers who literally give their
>lifes work so that I can afford to run a world class OS with world class
>tools, I owe much of what I know and how I make my living to people
>who share knowlege and information freely. This project is an attempt
>to meet that standard and pass on the only advantage that I have been
>given. If that sounds silly and idealistic and makes this a pipedream, so
>be it. RMS and I don't see eye to eye either, but, I respect his point of
>view. This is perhaps the most adverse, commercialized environment
>to attempt a community effort in and I expected some unpleasantness.
And no more unpleasant than many of the open source/ Linux advocates that can't get over the fact that the world does not bend to their idealistic wishes.
Their endless criticism and rhetoric does as much to turn off people to the idea of open source projects as it does to open peoples minds to the open source idea.
>If there is to be no community around it and the principles don't mean
>anything, it would be simpler and faster to pass the hat and pay some
>CS mercenaries to do it. Then how they did it could be kept secret and
>sold for what the market would bear. It would run on proprietary and
>expensive hardware and use yet another proprietary fieldbus etc. and
>nothing would change.
Not everyone has a deep seated disdain for proprietary solutions as you seem to have though...
Do you seriously think that Allen Bradley, Siemens, or whomever is going to give up and wither away just because there is an open source alternative available? Many companies like the support that they get from these proprietary
vendors and they are willing to pay the price that comes with sticking to a proprietary solution. I personally don't like having to pay big bucks for a fieldbus card when ethernet would be a much less expensive solution, but what I
personally think doesn't really matter when it comes right down to it. I can give my customers options (which would include an open source solution) but they will ultimately make the decision and I will smile and accept it. That is if I do want to keep them as a customer...
>I started to code the thing all by myself, but I
>thought and still think it would be better and mean a lot more if it were
>a community project. If I have become an obstacle to that, it's I who
>should leave. Listers, it's _your_ community and _your_ project, what
>do you think?
I think that if you continue to reject the efforts of people willing to contribute
to this project (such as Hugh Jack) then I don't think you will need worry about it. You will be the only one left here...
Regards,
Phil
_______________________________________________
LinuxPLC mailing list
[email protected]
http://linuxplc.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxplc