Subject: Re: impolitic statements (business model clues for the clueless)
From: Mark Eichin <eichin@thok.org>
Date: 17 Oct 2001 11:50:41 -0400


> RPM is kind of perverse -- the right idea but, from my "old school"

What part of it do you think is "the right idea" given that you then
turn around and say:

> seems to be optimized for binary, rather than source distributions.
> What the hell?

(and of course, have you looked at dpkg [and more importantly, apt],
on the Debian side... there *are* attempts to get that working under
some BSDs, specifically because "apt-get upgrade" is so addictive)
but again, we're not looking for an economic model to support that,
we've just got a reasonably efficient way to tap certain kinds of
enthusiasm :-)

> Sourceforge -- now there's a whole mess of "features" I could do

I've never understood why sourceforge would be useful in-enterprise,
which they seemed to see as a money-making option; while it *does* bug
tracking and source control and other project-related things, none of
them are either best-of-show or even all that helpful for an
environment where you don't have vast distribution among
semi-strangers.  It might serve the purpose of reducing (possibly
wasted) innovation in that space ("oh, great, another sourceforge")
and it does serve as a (minimal) *standard* for free software
distributed development.  Being able to say "it's up on sourceforge,
and it's called frobmaster" communicates a great deal of information
about what one can then do to participate in the work (the free
software benefit side of things.)  But there's no obvious market for
doing it "better", is there?