On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 4:09 AM, walt <w41...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 02/15/2014 12:30 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote: > > The social > > tactics at work from the systemd team (and verily, other Red Hat > > projects like GNOME) are reminiscent of Microsoft through the use of the > > "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" methodology. > > I certainly share your hostility towards M$ for suppressing competition. > > Red Hat, like M$, is a for-profit corporation, so I share your suspicion > that they want to suppress their competitors (though I don't know who > their competitors are). > > But comparing a completely closed-source shop like M$ to any open source > company leaves me feeling uneasy. I can't find the exact argument to > explain my unease, but I'm hoping someone else will jump in with a more > rational argument.
Once the vertical will be too high and spaghetti like, there will be no difference between close source and open source vendor, as nobody will be able to maintain the vertical without being payed for it. Even if one believes that he has a great fix/improvement, he won't be able to get it merged unless he is endorsed or work in specific vendor, as the roadmap, support matrix and content will be determined by that "open source" vendor. It will be impossible to fork it either as forking the entire vertical is out of the question. Regards, Alon
