Octavian Râsnita wrote:
> Why it is bad that a language like PHP is more useful for more
> programmers?
Because then they start thinking they're software engineers instead of
just programmers. They get credibility, without having earned it
through good engineering. They propagate their half-baked concepts and
good enough for what I did before hackery into areas that hurt their
clients, cause loss of money, success, and jobs, furthermore lowering
the reputation of anybody who claims the title software engineer.
You may disagree, or think that is not important. I think it is
important on a far deeper cultural level.
> You don't know how things work in other countries.
> Nobody cares about a contracts for software licences in my country.
EXACTLY. So trying to make money on contracts and software licenses is
useless. Obfuscating does nothing but try to enforce a software license
that will be ignored anyway - so what value does it provide?
> Maybe, but who knows this?
> The target audience should be the students, the future possible perl
> programmers.
How do you get their ear?
> Why should they be open source?
Because the code is analyzable, fixable, and can essentially be
maintained. Its a long-term strategy for sustainability in operations.
Because its your operations that make you money, not the how-you-did-it
glue in your perl code.
> Perl could be also used in commercial proprietary programs, and
> unfortunately in some countries it is very hard to earn money from
> open source.
You sell them a solution. This is where the money is.
> This is why I said that the software companies prefer Java, because
> nobody considers that it is something bad if a program made in Java is
> not open source.
Until the company they bought it from vanishes, the source code is lost,
they need to make a slight but critical change to the functionality, and
find that it is almost completely undoable because its compiled.
Hindsite is 20/20 - and we shouldn't have to convince a good business
person that the unknowable will happen. Limiting your options will
almost inevitably hurt you.
David
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org
> Why it is bad that a language like PHP is more useful for more
> programmers?
Because then they start thinking they're software engineers instead of
just programmers. They get credibility, without having earned it
through good engineering. They propagate their half-baked concepts and
good enough for what I did before hackery into areas that hurt their
clients, cause loss of money, success, and jobs, furthermore lowering
the reputation of anybody who claims the title software engineer.
You may disagree, or think that is not important. I think it is
important on a far deeper cultural level.
> You don't know how things work in other countries.
> Nobody cares about a contracts for software licences in my country.
EXACTLY. So trying to make money on contracts and software licenses is
useless. Obfuscating does nothing but try to enforce a software license
that will be ignored anyway - so what value does it provide?
> Maybe, but who knows this?
> The target audience should be the students, the future possible perl
> programmers.
How do you get their ear?
> Why should they be open source?
Because the code is analyzable, fixable, and can essentially be
maintained. Its a long-term strategy for sustainability in operations.
Because its your operations that make you money, not the how-you-did-it
glue in your perl code.
> Perl could be also used in commercial proprietary programs, and
> unfortunately in some countries it is very hard to earn money from
> open source.
You sell them a solution. This is where the money is.
> This is why I said that the software companies prefer Java, because
> nobody considers that it is something bad if a program made in Java is
> not open source.
Until the company they bought it from vanishes, the source code is lost,
they need to make a slight but critical change to the functionality, and
find that it is almost completely undoable because its compiled.
Hindsite is 20/20 - and we shouldn't have to convince a good business
person that the unknowable will happen. Limiting your options will
almost inevitably hurt you.
David
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: advocacy-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: advocacy-help@perl.apache.org