Reply to: The next big skill - Open Source?

[expat]

True, but then you blow air outward and suck inward.



I interpreted the OP to mean "Bugzilla rocks (is good), and I can name few closed source ones that do as well".

But the very fact that we're having this discussion means that either the OP is a muddleheaded nitwit and/or their first language isn't English.

I don't agree. You misunderstood the slang usage of "blow", and hammered the rest of the post to fit. All your difficulty of comprehension came from one misunderstanding on your part, one word whose meaning you thought was diametrically opposed to what it really is. Had you got "Bugzilla blows" = "Bugzilla sucks", then you would have had no problem reading the post.

[OwlHoot]

Ahem. When you give someone a "blow-job" you "suck" them, hence blow = suck, in this context.

True, but then you blow air outward and suck inward.

I would interpret "Can name a few closed source ones that do as well" to mean "I can name a few closed-source programs that also blow". I can't really see another interpretation; and parsing it was no problem, once I realised that I had to provide the implied subject "I".

I suppose that it is possible that the poster may have meant "I can name a few closed-source programs that do (i.e. perform) (some action) equally well". But I don't think so.

HTH

I interpreted the OP to mean "Bugzilla rocks (is good), and I can name few closed source ones that do as well".

But the very fact that we're having this discussion means that either the OP is a muddleheaded nitwit and/or their first language isn't English.

[scooterscot]

A defence project I'm working on makes use of open source for one of it's key functions....

It's cheaper, supportable, and yes... more reliable.

[darmstadt]

Well I'm working on big government projects at the moment and there is a fair bit of open source being used such as Debian, Apache, Derby, etc. but the real backbone is still very expensive stuff such as zOS, zVM, DB2, WAS, etc. but a lot of products that you'll buy from software companies include open source software now. When you get something from IBM and install it you'll nowadays see 2 license agreements, one for the propreitary stuff and one for the open source stuff. If you look at the Rational line of products, their nearly all based on Eclipse and a lot of their products have stuff like Ant, Derby, etc. bundled in. In some ways, its the way to go, in others I think its still too much in its infancy and only for testing/development work.

[expat]

I'm not sure whether "blows" is good or bad, although I suppose if it's the opposite of "sucks" that means you think it's good.

Also, I wasn't able to parse your second sentence, at least with any certainty, although I think I understood what you may have meant (with the word "a" omitted?)

Ahem. When you give someone a "blow-job" you "suck" them, hence blow = suck, in this context.

I would interpret "Can name a few closed source ones that do as well" to mean "I can name a few closed-source programs that also blow". I can't really see another interpretation; and parsing it was no problem, once I realised that I had to provide the implied subject "I".

I suppose that it is possible that the poster may have meant "I can name a few closed-source programs that do (i.e. perform) (some action) equally well". But I don't think so.

HTH

[OwlHoot]

Bugzilla blows. Can name a few closed source ones that do as well.

I'm not sure whether "blows" is good or bad, although I suppose if it's the opposite of "sucks" that means you think it's good.

Also, I wasn't able to parse your second sentence, at least with any certainty, although I think I understood what you may have meant (with the word "a" omitted?)

[bobspud]

Anyone seen this?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7910110.stm

Wonder if that means those of us who have had experience working with Open Source projects in the real world can see boom times coming regards government gigs?

Forget it. Most government departments have to use kit/software that forms part of the common criteria. To get on that list, the software / kit has to go through security evaluation by a dedicated team. It costs lots of money to go for this and that cash is paid by the software owner. The usual issue is that by the time things make it on the menu they are out of support with the vendors...

Any benefit in free software would be lost in accreditation and third party support costs. Open source just cannot work for governments in the current guise...

[threaded]

Ditto for cryptographic algorithms. All proprietary/closed source solutions suck or have major flaws or potential for or real back-doors. Stick to open source for those - the amount of work required to keep them secure is too vast for any single company to fund.

True, yet not just the algorithm, but the implementation too. Not many programmers can code up security stuff in any meaningful way. (Which is good for me.)

For example, one closed source implementation of an open source algorithm has just 256 'real' keys, instead of the several billion it should have. Will they ever fix it? Probably not.

[portseven]

Tomcat

It is one serious pile of mince.

If you think its that bad why don't you contribute some code to fix the issues? Thats the frikkin point with open source! People see bugs and they can fix them!

[DimPrawn]

Did I say that they ignore the UK's large pool of experienced contractors?

Tax dodging criminals in their minds.

[expat]

Anyone seen this?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7910110.stm

Wonder if that means those of us who have had experience working with Open Source projects in the real world can see boom times coming regards government gigs?

Gimme a break, that's not how UK Gov works. We have seen for years that their modus operandi is to give lucrative contracts to the likes of EDS and Accenture, while ignoring the UK's large pool of experienced contractors. Then they look to the Indians to revive the projects, while ignoring the UK's large pool of experienced contractors.

Meanwhile we are just costs, not assets. Costs that are too high, because these people have no idea of quality, and so no ability to detect real value for money.

Now they are looking at Open Source? Do you think that means "collaborative"? I think it means "free" to them.

Did I say that they ignore the UK's large pool of experienced contractors?

[DimPrawn]

I'm trying to think of a great big expensive IT system to get in to. I reckon there could be money to be made.

Something that would sap the life out of you but make you rich?

[rootsnall]

I'm trying to think of a great big expensive IT system to get in to. I reckon there could be money to be made.

It also must have source code that is the biggest heap of tulip you have ever seen.

[Pondlife]

nobody respects anything which is free

nobody will thank you for your free solution

Simple rule in IT, if it is not painfully expensive, avoid it

Milan.

I'm trying to think of a great big expensive IT system to get in to. I reckon there could be money to be made.

[TimberWolf]

Do you consider the Web to be IT? Because I'd say that was the greatest open source project in history, and at least the big 20 websites aren't just respected... they pretty much rule the planet.

Ditto for cryptographic algorithms. All proprietary/closed source solutions suck or have major flaws or potential for or real back-doors. Stick to open source for those - the amount of work required to keep them secure is too vast for any single company to fund.