Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 2nd Mar 2010 14:04 UTC
SkyOS Over the past couple of months, I've been getting a number of emails asking me about SkyOS' status. Since I didn't know anything beyond what's on the SkyOS website, and because, well, I have no affiliation with SkyOS, I couldn't really reply to these emails. However, after yet another email sent to me late last week, I decided to simply... Email Robert Szeleney, the man behind the project.
Thread beginning with comment 411769
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: open source?
by Kroc on Tue 2nd Mar 2010 14:18 UTC in reply to "open source?"
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

SkyOS is known for being in a perpetual state of unfinishedness. Open sourcing it would make it even more so.

Apologies for being a troll, but I do not feel that open sourcing it is necessarily the solution. It’s his project and I’d rather hear it directly from him where he wants it to go.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: open source?
by merkoth on Tue 2nd Mar 2010 14:25 in reply to "RE: open source?"
merkoth Member since:
2006-09-22

SkyOS is known for being in a perpetual state of unfinishedness. Open sourcing it would make it even more so.

Why?


Apologies for being a troll, but I do not feel that open sourcing it is necessarily the solution. It’s his project and I’d rather hear it directly from him where he wants it to go.

What's better: An unfinished project being worked on, or just an unfinished project?

Reply Parent Score: 9

RE[3]: open source?
by kaiwai on Tue 2nd Mar 2010 21:26 in reply to "RE[2]: open source?"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

SkyOS is known for being in a perpetual state of unfinishedness. Open sourcing it would make it even more so.

Why?


I suggest you take a look at OpenSolaris. So much promise when it was originally open sourced only to find there has been bugger all outside contributions from the great unwashed programming masses. Open sourcing something isn't the panacea to solve all of lifes problems.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: open source?
by Anonymous Penguin on Tue 2nd Mar 2010 14:31 in reply to "RE: open source?"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

SkyOS is known for being in a perpetual state of unfinishedness. Open sourcing it would make it even more so.

Apologies for being a troll, but I do not feel that open sourcing it is necessarily the solution. It’s his project and I’d rather hear it directly from him where he wants it to go.


What could he add to what he just said? He even mentions "potential new project owners"
I hope he doesn't make the same mistake as Tal Danzig of Libranet: he was hoping to make a fortune from Libranet code, and he killed the project in the process (not that a real comparison is possible, Libranet was a great OS from every point of view, still missed by its fans).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: open source?
by danieldk on Tue 2nd Mar 2010 16:46 in reply to "RE[2]: open source?"
danieldk Member since:
2005-11-18

I hope he doesn't make the same mistake as Tal Danzig of Libranet: he was hoping to make a fortune from Libranet code, and he killed the project in the process (not that a real comparison is possible, Libranet was a great OS from every point of view, still missed by its fans).


That is not completely true, however I understand that from the outside that may have been the impression. Tal had been talking to a company, but also to some Libranet users with a development background. The idea was that if we could come up with a good proposal, that Adminmenu and the Libranet installer would become open source. Having a sound plan was important to Tal since, for obvious reasons, the code was very dear to him.

We made a proposal for 'OpenLibranet', and while we were in agreement technically, we could not agree on a full plan. The thing was that he wanted us to make a first version (OpenLibranet 3.1), and if that turned out to be acceptable, Libranet would go opensource.

Being a former Libranet employee, I knew how much time and energy goes into building a full release. Since OpenLibranet would be volunteer work, the team backing it would have to work long nights for at least half a year to make a release. That was too much of an investment if in the end the whole deal can fail.

We then agreed to let it rest. But both sides did their best to free Libranet.

Now Libranet is nothing but a very good memory, and no current Debian-distribution comes even close to providing something as user-friendly and extensive as Adminmenu or the Libranet installer. I still cherish my Libranet 3.0 CD set, but unfortunately I lost (removed) my last checkout of our internal Subversion development tree. Would be fun to see how much still builds ;) .

Edited 2010-03-02 16:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[2]: open source?
by dexter11 on Wed 3rd Mar 2010 11:20 in reply to "RE: open source?"
dexter11 Member since:
2008-01-11

SkyOS is known for being in a perpetual state of unfinishedness. Open sourcing it would make it even more so.
That's just wrong. Just because a software is open sourced it doesn't make it bad. Bad development does. Or no development like in this case.

Apologies for being a troll, but I do not feel that open sourcing it is necessarily the solution. It’s his project and I’d rather hear it directly from him where he wants it to go.

Then what's your solution? Because I see none. This project is dead regardless what Szeleney says. And nothing will bring it back to life IMO not even open sourcing it. He's sitting on the code for far too long. According to http://www.skyos.org/board/viewtopic.php?p=99308#p99308 this forum post<a/> he's sitting on it for 4 years. One would think that it's pretty obvious by now that nobody wants to buy it.

Actually open sourcing would be at least a graceful death. At least let other projects use what they can from SkyOS code if he dosn't do anything with it.

Reply Parent Score: 2