Subject: Re: street performer protocol
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 14:04:34 +0900 (JST)

>>>>> "Crispin" == Crispin Cowan <crispin@wirex.com> writes:

    Crispin> Now, suppose RH "unfunds" GNOME.  They could do it by:

    Crispin>    * laying off the GNOME folk, or
    Crispin>    * assigning the GNOME folk to other work

    Crispin> Since Stephen's postulate is that GNOME is unfunded due
    Crispin> to a drop in RH revenues, we'll assume pink slips.

Nothing wrong with that assumption, it's simple.

However, what I had in mind was that Red Hat would not accept the drop
in revenue passively, but would assign gnomes to dwarves' work
(dwarves' work being more closely connected to immediate revenue
production).

The point being that Red Hat probably wouldn't necessarily want to
_abandon_ the GNOME strategy completely (presumably they adopted it
for technical merit or license, and that advantage would remain),
rather postpone it (and of course GNOME developers probably could
transfer at relatively low cost to KDE, as compared to new trainees).

But many gnomes would rather quit and find some way to work on GNOME
(perhaps as a new startup).  This is an example of the process I see
tending to push Linux distributions toward specializing in something
other than new development.

-- 
University of Tsukuba                Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences       Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091
_________________  _________________  _________________  _________________
What are those straight lines for?  "XEmacs rules."