OpenSource for Amiga.

[asian1]

>AmiZilla US$ 4000 fund

Hello
If there is a similar US$ 100,000 fund for OpenSource Amiga software developments, which software projects should be given priority?

Is it GeekGadget, OpenOffice, AbiWord, GTK, X-Windows, or others?

Is it better to port "commercial" portability tools first? (such as MKS, Bristol, QT others)

[alx]

I had an idea a while ago, and linking it to the idea of the AmiZilla bounty makes it quite interesting.  Basically, there would be a website where people would vote on what software they wanted made/ported.  The top few would then be listed, and people could donate money to the project of their choice.

Drastic maybe, but perhaps this kind of thing is what's needed to spark Amiga software development?

As for me, I'd personally like any M$ compatible office suite.

[bloodline]

asian1 wrote:
>AmiZilla US$ 4000 fund

Hello
If there is a similar US$ 100,000 fund for OpenSource Amiga software developments, which software projects should be given priority?

Is it GeekGadget, OpenOffice, AbiWord, GTK, X-Windows, or others?

Is it better to port "commercial" portability tools first? (such as MKS, Bristol, QT others)

Before we need any Opensource Apps, we need an Open Source Operating system  :-D

Wouldn't you agree?

[Alkemyst]

Before we need any Opensource Apps, we need an Open Source Operating system

Wouldn't you agree?

NO

[dammy]

by bloodline on 2003/5/28 10:18:57

Before we need any Opensource Apps, we need an Open Source Operating system

Wouldn't you agree?

I thought we already had one.  :-D

Dammy

[xeron]

bloodline wrote:
Before we need any Opensource Apps, we need an Open Source Operating system  :-D

Wouldn't you agree?

In all honesty, absolutely not. This is not a sleight against AROS, which I'm interested to see, but in my experience large-scale open source applications (such as Linux, Open Office, Mozilla etc.) tend to "evolve" as many programmers contribute (often having different, even conflicting goals), rather than follow a designed path. This quite often leads to problems with consistency across the application, large size, etc.

With AROS and OpenBEOS this isn't so much of a problem as they have a blueprint to follow. Sure there are examples of good and bad in both proprietory and open source applications (Windows is a badly implemented proprietory system, for example), but I don't like the way large open-source applications tend to evolve.

This is, of course, just my opinion.

I should note that i'm not against Open Source per se, but I don't think as a development model it is the ideal one for an AmigaOS-like system.

And again, I do recognise that AROS seems to be pretty cool, and I do not underestimate the value of the code it has contributed to both MOS and AmigaOS. AROS has benefitted from having a blueprint to follow, and from being in such a small niche that it has remained withing the control of a select group that can shape it.

[bloodline]

dammy wrote:
by bloodline on 2003/5/28 10:18:57

Before we need any Opensource Apps, we need an Open Source Operating system

Wouldn't you agree?

I thought we already had one.  :-D

Dammy

We almost do :-D

[MarkTime]

well money is a motivator, but in kind of an oblique way.

I would recommend that AmiZilla be kind of a test case.  I know the 50k Amiga, Inc. got, bot the community zilcho, and the prepayments, though generous, sent to phase5, bought the community zilcho, and the nice wad of cash, sent for iFusion, got us only a partially working iFusion.....

lets see if this produces results.  I could see 100K easily being spent on a big bunch of nothing.  You see, once you get 100k, people will look at projects that really need 250k, and you never win that game, it probably would cost 500 million or more to really take the world by storm again....

if this produces results, lets do it again.  if it doesn't...lets call it a failure and don't do it again.

I think AmiZilla is a nice idea, but let it prove itself with results.

[Dr_Righteous]

Indeed, I too believe AROS is too important to be open source... Freeware and open to contribution, but not redistributable like Linux.

S'Just how I see it... *shrug*

[bloodline]

Dr_Righteous wrote:
Indeed, I too believe AROS is too important to be open source... Freeware and open to contribution, but not redistributable like Linux.

S'Just how I see it... *shrug*

Interesting frame of refreance there!?!? AROS will never be like Linux... For one thing we will keep the Distributions together. That is to say the cores should be all the same, thus all DI's should be compatible, differing in only look and supplied programs.

I don't like linux for many reasons, but one of these is that I can't get an x86 Linux binary and know it's going to run on my Linux box... but I do like the fact I can get the source code and compile it for my Linux box... Swings and roundabouts

[Dr_Righteous]

@ Bloodline:

Funny, I have the opposite problem with Linux... I can never find a binary for decent programs... End up having to download 5000 libraries to get one program to compile.

@ Coders:

If you're going to use an outside library to write your program, INCLUDE IT IN YOUR DISTRIBUTION! Don't make people search for it.

[asian1]

>Linux library -recompile

Hello
I got similar problems with MPLAYER, involving buggy GCC compiler (W_Char), buggy ID3 TAG program, Cassowary, unfinished LIBDVDNav, in-compatible library version etc.

If you got special hardware (ie AMD, Pentium CPU without MMX), then the program may not run or run slowly.

Perhaps this is an opportunity for AmigaDE (AMP capability) + Utility computing.

If AmigaDE is ported to AROS / Linux, perhaps if someone need a program, he can order automatic cross-compiling using Utility computing, without downloading source / libraries.

The user will receive complete pre-compiled binaries, optimized for his computer/PDA/ preferences.

[Fats]

Dr_Righteous wrote:
Indeed, I too believe AROS is too important to be open source... Freeware and open to contribution, but not redistributable like Linux.

I'm an AROS developer and for me being open source is a must to be able to contribute to the project. The assurance that I will have access to what other people do with the AROS code is a condition on which I contribute my code.
But then I also like linux.

[Dr_Righteous]

Well, my point really is this... I only want to see one distribution of AROS... As in I want to see AROS, not RedHat AROS or SUSE AROS or some crap like that.

Versions for different CPUs not withstanding, of course  :-D

[bbrv]

Edited by Argo: Flamebait and Off topic