Over the weekend Linux.com posted an article discussing lessons learned over the last two years of Xara's open source adventure.
http://www.linux.com/feature/119790
Best,
Printable View
Over the weekend Linux.com posted an article discussing lessons learned over the last two years of Xara's open source adventure.
http://www.linux.com/feature/119790
Best,
I'd say this is a perfect case of live-by-the-sword-die-by-the-sword, for both sides.
The article is dead on... there is absolutely no way Xara can expect developers to volunteer time on a project that can easily be pulled from under the developers feet at any moment. That's exactly what the problem is here. By keeping a crucial part of Xara Xtreme under wraps, they are putting doubts in developers minds about the willingness of Xara to continue supporting the project. If Xara were to pull the plug on the project, what would the developers have to show for their work? Nothing. They couldn't fork it without reworking everything and why would anyone want to do that when they could contribute to Inkscape or other projects?
Ultimately Xara wanted developers to volunteer with no guarantees that their work would amount to anything. That's laughable and shows the lack of understanding Xara has for the open source community.
On a side note, Xara could have their way with CDraw as well as save this project and their reputation by having Xara developers start a port of Xara Xtreme based on Cairo or (much faster) QT that is fully open. In any case, it would have to be a serious effort, minus the stagnation and lip service.
Come on guys, the project is dead - so what? Whining about the fact that a company isn't willing to give their jewels out to "the open source community" is a waste of time.
The Linux.com article (together with the additional comments from the author within the Xara Developer mailing list) makes me feel, that this kind of "open source community" seems to be a Kindergarten - another lesson learned from this project.
Remi
I totally agree with you remi. Alot ppl are definatly acting very childish and giving the whole (FLOSS, GNU and so forth) community a bad name. And the stuff on the mailinglist from the last few days is infact embarrasing, I dont even wanna show my sig :(
I agree Remi and Con. I read through the current dev mailing list at xaraxtreme.org and was very disappointed in Philipp Schmieder's attitude and rather poor understanding of Open Source.
Linux has been around for over 15 years and the concept of Open Source Software is over 30 years old. It is suprising how many people appear to think that Open Source is a relatively recent innovation. The Free Software Movement launched in 1983 was not associated with the older custom of some software vendors to supply the source code along with the binaries. In the mid 1970s Digital Research, makers of Control Program for Microcomputers (CP/M) provided the source code when you bought the software directly from their company.
Historical Note: CP/M was developed to be a Unix like operating system that would run on the *new* microprocessor systems. Almost 20 years later Linux was developed to be a Unix like operating system that would run on an IBM compatible PC which ran DOS that was backward compatible with CP/M. :D
Open Source is to allow people to make changes as they need them. The code for the CDRAW core is not needed to make any changes to use, modify for a specific distro, or add features to XaraLX.
I suppose I should not be suprised that there are people that want to have everything for free. I see people accept a job then complain when they are required to actually work for a pay check. :rolleyes:
This is the biggest reason that Linux (although mainstream in the commercial / business industry)... will have a long / hard struggle to become mainstream "Home" OS... (if even ever)??
Soquili knows where I stand with these types of devs and their outlook... Too many people view the idiology of "Linux" in a "give me for free" perspective... which is "NOT" what "open-source" means....
But then they just argue that it "is" the idea... and simply dismiss those who disagree as being unequal in intelligence....
It's too bad that Linux Militants ruin all the fun for the rest of us... The negotiation table is closed, so... no big deal, I'll continue to use Xara LX "as is"... it is already quite a useful and enjoyable tool the way it stands... (I use it for more then 1/2 of my output) the rest is with Pro on my XP machine....
Who knows... maybe one day the project will be resurected with devs who are more flexible in their understanding of open-source?? ;)
And just maybe an even different engine other than Cairo can be considered, such as Pandora or FryRender?? :)
lol...if I had a penny for every time I've read "The biggest reason linux wont go mainstream...".
I dont think there is just one reason, and I dont think that what geminiguy wrote really matters at all (no dis-respect). Remember that linux is something like 0.5-2% of the whole Desktop market. Apple has some small share and the rest ~97% is Windows with most of its users very accustomed to paying for software.
+ every time I see this "argument", one important
example comes to mind - and, I'll say, the linux com
article cannot be taken to represent most linux users...
anybody can start a website with linux in the name.
In truth, Linux has grown, NOT by following the suggestions
of that article, but, instead, by being as flexible as possible
in including packages, as they are made available from
whatever source.
As for the example, look at Adobe's totally without cost to
linux users, Acro-read... tens of thousands of happy linux
users... but Adobe did not hand over their code, or right
to their product... they simply shared a useful tool with the
linux community.
Pity this project is no longer being developed for Linux. I've just found it and like it a lot. I'm not a developer I'm not a graphics expert what I do know is I don't care all I want is a good programme like Xtreme to be free. I don't really care whether it is fully open, semi open I only want it to be free and to be improved.
Now not being very good at graphics, learning xtreme is easier than learning inkscape IMHO. One contributor said that the core engine does not need to be opensource for developrs to improve or adjust xtreme to make it better. Forget the puritan view with only Gimp and Inkscape as the only two tidy graphics programs in the opensource community, can the Linux community afford not to help Xara with Xtreme. We need more quality programs and the code that is developed in Xtreme can then be used in Inkscape or Gimp and vice versa. There must be some sort of half way house in development of software even mysql has a version you can buy (even if it is only support in mysql, Even Linux it self in the form of redhat, Suse sell versions of the operating system) surely the industry can come to a good compromise on something that is proprietery and open otherwise the biggest loser will be the opensource community. Even if you end up a product at under £50/$50 that's better than Adobe for that price every one wins. Even a strategy of normal and pro (normal free, pro pay for) is better than no development in Xtreme. This is just my two peneth wort on the subject.
We have a fully 100% open version now lets run with it. We can't afford not not to!Quote:
On February 20 Carl Worth -- the principal developer of Cairo -- volunteered to do just that. Worth excised the CDraw library from Xara LX, replaced each call with a dummy function, and posted the code to his public Git repository. Moir replied with an offer to host the code on Xara's servers, and even develop it as an official, parallel branch of Xara LX.
That's my entire point.... You want it "free"?? Why should it be free for some and not for others?? Why should Xara just simply give it to you for free??
This is exactly my point with many Linux users.... they want and expect that all the software is free... This is exactly why many other types of developers refuse to format for Linux... Why should they??
Do you realize what it costs a company to format their software for Linux??? Why would they go through all that work and spend all that $$$ just to simply give it away?
Linux does not mean "everything free" This is not its basis of ideology. And this, is just one of many reasons that this project completely flopped.
There is someone still working with it though, as we continue to get updated versions, and I thank that or those people
If the project were ever to be finished / complete and Xara said "Ok, now... that will be $79.00 please" I would more than happily fork over the dough.... because it's great software... Im not gonna get mad and not use it cuz it should be free because Im a Linux user.....
But I would truly like to know your reason as to why it should be "free" for you and other linux users.... when everyone else pays $79.00 for it?? (BTW a much more than reasonable price for such a great software... compaired to up to $700.00 for others which are not even as good or user friendly)
But I guess that's not enough..... in Xara's end :rolleyes:
Well said Paul, I couldn't agree more!
The point of opensource is the code is free to use and change, being that the code is free to use and change, how can any company charge a fee then someone come along alter it slightly and release it free of charge. If it is going to be opensource it has no option but to be free. The money making model has to be in a another form other than the programme. You can get outside development on it but you then have to pay royalties to the outside programmers. Why should an opensource developer spend time and effort on it and not get rewarded. This is the other side of your argument. Or you could have two versions one free one enhanced version that you pay for. Many companies use this model. This way Xara get a revenue stream and the opensource community get a brilliant free package of graphics software. It seems the most logical way of doing it that both sides can be happy with.
I think you are missing my original point. There is no good reason for opensource developers not to get involved even if the part that is proprietary is kept by Xara
so long as the programme is free. Otherwise the opensource community is being used. That does not mean you don't have a pay for version it just means the free version is always playing catch up as it is always an older version with less features.
To give an example of this look to Sun they have staroffice and the opensource version openoffice. Sun are one of the biggest names in the business if they can do it so can Xara.
That's the point: Why should an developer spend time and effort on it? What could be the motivation, if you know, that the company earns money through "enhanced versions" of that software (which also contains your code = your work/time/effort)? The company makes the big money, but the open source developer works for nothing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dai
Ok, another idea: The software should be open and nobody should make money with it. The developer should code just for fun, in order to create a great solution. That's a fine idea - "the modern socialist movement of the Open Source Community". :rolleyes: :)
But how is reality? Do you live in such a system of economic organization?
No, in reality the company which starts a open source project tries to earn money through commercial services like support contracts or individual projects with customers. Perhaps the company is in need for an developer to help them with such a project and the company ask one or two open source developers to work for them. But if the primary goal of the company is, to use the capacity of their own developers, the open source developers don't see money for their generous free work, again. :o
Ok, this can not be. Our open source developer isn't willing to believe that it is so bad. He is thinking about the third concept: The developer knows, that he earns no money and accept the fact, that other people earns money through his "free" work. The developer knows, that the work he is doing is a great thing and he knows also, that he can use the source code to develop another project with. But wait, there is a license agreement: He can't use this code in other projects, if the second project uses another (incompatible) open soure license. Oh my, that's right. And the next problem seems to be, that some of the other open source projects are using completely different libraries. Therefore he is not able to use his code within Inkscape. But wait, our open source developer knows, that he is able to use the complete source code of this project for years and therefore it's really worth to invest time in this project. Err, excuse me. I'm really sorry, but there is a little problem: One of the most important part of this software isn't available as source code. The company hasn't released it and isn't willing to do that in the future. :eek:
Hmmm, ... the developer starts to think about Open Source software. Do you know, why he should spend time and effort on it? :confused:
Remi
Dai, That "was" the problem, Xara said they would not free their "Main / Secret ingriedient" so the Devs got mad and quit. Their arguement??? "Xara should just give it to us... we can go no further without it" :confused:
My answer... why not use one of the engines from InkScape?? or Gimp?? Or one of the many others out there?? Slower?? Yes, of course it is... but then again it's free ;)
Devs say "Not good enough, forget it"
But Xara continues to update, and make those updates available to us.... I think that's pretty cool of them, don't you?
And remember... this is after Xara put "a lot" of time and $$$$ into this project... They're still holding up their end, as best they can.... Where's our Devs?? (no disrespect but... I mean..... c'mon) :)
I know Novell actually sponsor the work on OpenOffice. Since there are alternative engines there is no reason for development to stop from the opensource community it's not as if we are over flowing with quality graphics software.
The problem is, there are no more Open Source developers interested in Xara Xtreme.
The graphics engine of Inkscape is really slow. That's the reason why the Inkscape developers are trying to change the code to use another graphics engine. But it's a long way to go. The code is in development (since months).
I don't think, that's possible to use Gimp's graphics engine.
Once again, the question is why should a developer spend time and effort on it?
Remi
Couldn't have said it better myself...But still hoping it would change.Quote:
The problem is, there are no more Open Source developers interested in Xara Xtreme.
All, in all though... the last Ill say on this is... even unfinished, Xara LX proves to be an extremely useful graphics tool, and it is very pleasant to work with. I enjoy it very much, and it is what I use to produce a good 80% of my work :D
It may never be finished, but I am very grateful for what there is.
I've been using Xara for a long while now, and I really like it. I see no "Donate" button on the site though - what's up with that? I often pay for programs that I like, and use often, and gladly will for this one.
Hmmm. Actually a good point. As pretty much all Linux projects use the donation idea to help along with development, even often making products related to the project, i.e. t-shirts, hats, etc.... and it actually works pretty well.. That would have been a great idea to put some perspective on the interest in the project from the outside.
It would have shown the people at Xara that there are many who use it and are interested in it. They could have done a poll too, to see just how many Linux users would like to see it move on (it would have shown the Linux devs as well). and the poll could have also asked how many would "pay" for it in completed stage.
There should have been an open forum between Linux devs / Xara / and the general public users... Maybe those things would have made a difference, maybe not.
If you'll look at the usage statistics on autopackage.org: http://www.autopackage.org/statistic...vid=16&days=14
You'll see that Xara is still in quite high demand. On average, there are ~30 installs per day...
Two very good reasons people have over looked.Quote:
why should a developer spend time and effort on it?
1. They like the program and want to see it move on
2. To get experience in coding
These are two very good reasons why opensource coders contribute code and there must loads out there that would do so. After all what and how they use there code with other software is still up to them, it's there code.