Open source has come far, no doubt. Let’s take a look at the three distinct
generations:
The Richard Stallman generation:
Founding the free software movement in the 80s, this
generation built GNU and the FSF, which made it possible a decade later for
Linux-based operating systems to function. As FOSS purists, they also tended to
view free software as a “moral crusade”, and they remained relatively marginal
within the mainstream technology world.
Linux Kernel generation:
They were the first to have access to free/open source
operating systems that actually worked by combining Linus Torvalds's free
kernel with GNU utilities. This second generation was less ideological than the
first generation. Torvalds et all favoured open source primarily for functional,
not moral, reasons. They saw it as a more efficient way to code, and a less
expensive means of working with computers. But they were still independent, and
wary of becoming corporate minions. This
is where the lines begin to blur or split between what is FOSS and what is Open-Source. This generation also brought GNU/Linux into the mainstream. They wrote the code that
made open source operating systems not just functional, but top-tier and
competitive with professional closed-source platforms. They also faced bitter
battles with Microsoft in the late 90s and early 2000s, which younger coders
perhaps do not fully appreciate. People who were not active open source
programmers or users before the mid-2000s probably take it for granted that
they do not have to worry about potentially being sued for using GNU/Linux.
Today's Generation (Gen 3):
This is the generation that came of age once GNU/Linux was
already the defacto operating system for millions of servers, at a time when no
one questioned the value of open source code. For this generation, open
source is no longer an argument. It's a default. For that reason, the
ideological and functionalist debates have largely disappeared from the scene.
Most open source programmers today do not give away code because they think it
is the morally right thing to do, or because they deem it more efficient. They
do it because there is no real alternative in an increasing number of niches. From
the cloud (where OpenStack reigns supreme) to big data (where Hadoop, Spark and
a host of NoSQL databases are now conquering the proprietary holdouts) to SDN
and NFV, open source dominates. If you want to work in these ecosystems, you
have to use open source. Most open
source supporters no doubt see this as a good thing. The trend toward licensing
everything under Apache licenses, rather than the GPL, will not please people
who think the Apache terms are too liberal. Similarly, the increasing influence
of corporations in the open source space -- heralded most recently by
controversy over the Linux Foundation's change to its by-laws -- has caused
some tensions within the community. Last
but not least, the open source community's cozying-up to Microsoft in recent
years, while seemingly normal to members of the third open source generation,
may not sit completely comfortably with people who lived through the struggles
of yore.
adapted from write up by: Christopher Tozzi | The VAR Guy
No comments:
Post a Comment