#92 Re: Nota a Linus sobre su opiñon de RMS
Originalmente publicado por
martinm
Andrea, sobre las condiciones de vida en anarres, es exactamente lo que transforman en un sin sentido el socialismo en ese planeta.
Anarres, a la larga es otra variante de las comunidades utopicas fundadas por los socialistas utópicos (valga la redundancia) de a ppios del siglo XIX, con la diferencia de que es en otro planeta.
Es un delirio, porque no solo el planeta no esta en condiciones, sino los habitantes de anarres no pueden despelgar fuerzas productivas para transformalo en un paraiso.
Entonces no has leido el texto que dejé oculto. Jamás Anarres se convirtió en un paraiso y eso nunca fué planteado en la novela.
Pero si quieres conversar exclusivamente acerca de "The Dispossessed" os invito a hacerlo
en privado (eres muy bienvenido a hacerlo) o en otro foro.
Originalmente publicado por
ezeaguerre
Y hablando de américa latina, de casualidad viste el documental "La Revolución no Será Transmitida"?, de la televisión Irlandesa
omg, si os referís a "The revolution will not be televised" de la RTÉ (Radio Telefís Éireann), por supuesto que si, pero fué hace un millón de años. Muy buen documental, pero no lo recuerdo completo. ¿cómo has dado con él? Pero contestame en privado.
Originalmente publicado por
rohan2k
Che, no no estamos ya yendo demasiado de tema?
No en realidad.
Con respecto a conversar exclusivamente sobre literatura, totalmente de acuerdo. Con respecto a la temática, no.
Originalmente publicado por
LuisManson
Rohan2k, totalmente, yo vi hasta el mensaje 86 y me calle por no ser mala onda, pero realmente se fueron, lejos...
¿en qué sentido? No se entiende muy bien, al menos yo.
Originalmente publicado por
LuisManson
Les recuerdo que tenemos el foro de literatura
Asi es y de mi parte ningún interés de comenzar una polémica acerca de literatura.
Ahora, continuando con el tema.
"
The Cathedral and the Bazzar" de Eric S. Raymond ¿lo han leido?........ Es un libro.
The Cathedral and the Bazaar
Linux is subversive. Who would have thought even five years ago (1991) that a world-class operating system could coalesce as if by magic out of part-time hacking by several thousand developers scattered all over the planet, connected only by the tenuous strands of the Internet?
Certainly not I. By the time Linux swam onto my radar screen in early 1993, I had already been involved in Unix and open-source development for ten years. I was one of the first GNU contributors in the mid-1980s. I had released a good deal of open-source software onto the net, developing or co-developing several programs (nethack, Emacs's VC and GUD modes, xlife, and others) that are still in wide use today. I thought I knew how it was done.
Linux overturned much of what I thought I knew. I had been preaching the Unix gospel of small tools, rapid prototyping and evolutionary programming for years. But I also believed there was a certain critical complexity above which a more centralized, a priori approach was required. I believed that the most important software (operating systems and really large tools like the Emacs programming editor) needed to be built like cathedrals, carefully crafted by individual wizards or small bands of mages working in splendid isolation, with no beta to be released before its time.
Linus Torvalds's style of development—release early and often, delegate everything you can, be open to the point of promiscuity—came as a surprise. No quiet, reverent cathedral-building here—rather, the Linux community seemed to resemble a great babbling bazaar of differing agendas and approaches (aptly symbolized by the Linux archive sites, who'd take submissions from anyone) out of which a coherent and stable system could seemingly emerge only by a succession of miracles.
The fact that this bazaar style seemed to work, and work well, came as a distinct shock. As I learned my way around, I worked hard not just at individual projects, but also at trying to understand why the Linux world not only didn't fly apart in confusion but seemed to go from strength to strength at a speed barely imaginable to cathedral-builders.
By mid-1996 I thought I was beginning to understand. Chance handed me a perfect way to test my theory, in the form of an open-source project that I could consciously try to run in the bazaar style. So I did—and it was a significant success.
This is the story of that project. I'll use it to propose some aphorisms about effective open-source development. Not all of these are things I first learned in the Linux world, but we'll see how the Linux world gives them particular point. If I'm correct, they'll help you understand exactly what it is that makes the Linux community such a fountain of good software—and, perhaps, they will help you become more productive yourself.
Eric S. Raymond no es de mi agrado, pero ésta parte en particular me parece interesante.