LOGIN | REGISTER NOW | SUBSCRIBE
 
 
News on Monday
more>>
SharePoint Tech Report
more>>


   

 
 
Download Current Issue
ISSUE 7/1/2009 PDF

Need Back Issues?
DOWNLOAD HERE

Receive the print Edition?


 
Is the mystery Borland suitor Serena?
Borland software is considering an offer from another company after a preliminary deal with MicroFocus. Is Serena the new company?
06/30/2009 01:55 PM EST

Windows 7 - An eBayer's dream product?
Windows 7 pre-orders can make people money on eBay.
06/29/2009 03:48 PM EST

Know thine cloud provider
Cloud computing require companies to understand compliance and regulation. Third parties will play a big role in regulated industries.
06/29/2009 02:58 PM EST

 

Microsoft Worldwide Partner Conf.
7/13/2009 to 7/16/2009
New Orleans
Microsoft

OSCON (Open Source Convention)
7/20/2009 to 7/24/2009
San Jose
O'Reilly Media

XBRL Technology Workshop & Summit
7/28/2009 to 7/30/2009
Santa Clara
XBRL US

ACM SIGGRAPH
8/3/2009 to 8/7/2009
New Orleans
ACM SIGGRAPH

OpenSource World (formerly LinuxWorld)
8/12/2009 to 8/13/2009
San Francisco
IDG World Expo


 
print Printable version 
Most Read Latest News Blog Resources
Kapow automates website data retrieval
Kapow Technology's Web Data Server 7.0 can be used to create modules that navigate through...

Oracle's Fusion 11g lays groundwork for ERP platform
Fusion's components are standards-based and integrated, but some abilities are lost if non...

COBOL’s future lies in the clouds
After 50 years of use in businesses, COBOL is still lingering around mainframes. But the s...

Digg!  Digg
Reddit  Reddit
Slashdot  Slashdot
Share on facebook  Facebook
Share on Twitter  Twitter

Letters to the Editor


By SD Times News Team
February 1, 2006 — 
Following are some comments on Mike Prest’s “Runtime Issues,” a letter to the editor in the Jan. 1 issue of SD Times [page 27]:

Paragraph 1 – Mike, Java is backward compatible unless it was written specifically for Java 1.1 or Microsoft’s Java (or any version after). The problem lies with the developers, not Java. So if it doesn’t work, it is the developer’s fault. There is a UI toolkit that will work with all JVMs back to 1.1 (Nexaweb).

Paragraph 2 – Mike, seeing that you had problems/questions in the previous paragraph, it doesn’t surprise me that you have issues with stacktraces and Java application servers. Again, the problem here is not Java. CF on Java? There are bound to be issues.?Logs? Those come from the app server, not Java. Pick another vendor for your app server. If you can’t (if CF won’t let you), then get a different UI tool. You also probably should find an experienced and knowledgeable developer to help you out.

Paragraph 3 – Yes, Java has many names.?Some are useful, and some are not. Things like this happen when you have a large product, and a large company and a marketing department. Anyone who is actively involved with Java will have no problem, though.

Paragraph 4 – Mike, the reality is that computers and software development are not easy. When computers (and software) run, they are great. When they don’t, they are major pains.?As for “easy to port,” Java doesn’t need to be ported. That is one of the great things about Java—it is portable. Mind you, it doesn’t prevent you from making it not portable. Many of us develop on one OS and deploy to one or more other OSes.

Mike, Java is not perfect, but nothing is. I’ve used and still use other programming languages/platforms. They have their own pains and many times are worse.

Mark Nuttall Winston-Salem, N.C.

Defending Subversion
In his opinion piece [“Why Commercial SCM Tools Are Better Than Open-Source Tools,” Dec. 15, page 32], AccuRev CTO Damon Poole makes various false or misleading claims about Subversion, and about open-source software in general. He also implies that only proprietary SCM systems are worthy of serious consideration.

Given that his company competes directly against open-source systems such as Subversion, it’s understandable that he’d want his readers to think this, but it is a disservice to those who simply want the best solution to their change management problems.

Poole states that the Subversion project has “accomplished only the first two of their four goals, atomic transactions and fast branching.” Our goals, which number far more than four, have been listed prominently on our home page, subversion.tigris.org, since the project started. Furthermore, we accomplished the goals that we targeted for our 1.0 release in 2004, have made three new feature releases since then, and are currently working on some of the very capabilities he claims we’re ignoring. Again, this is all being done publicly and openly; on our mailing lists we regularly answer questions about features currently under development.

He also seems to underestimate the amount of commercial investment made in Subversion development. CollabNet (disclaimer: my employer) started the project in 2000, and has funded it consistently for six years, as of this writing, by employing several full-time developers, subsidizing QA and some requirements elicitation research, and providing hosting and infrastructure support. While we do not in principle agree with Poole’s claims about the link between funding and innovation, in this case he does not do justice to the amount of funding anyway.

Later, he uses dollars spent in 1994 versus 2004 to measure the increase in popularity of commercial SCM systems. This is spurious because the software industry itself has grown so much during that time; worse, it is conveniently incommensurate with growth in open-source adoption, since open-source software doesn’t have license fees. Yet we know that open-source adoption has been extremely robust during that decade. Why doesn’t Poole attempt a relative comparison, instead of uselessly comparing proprietary SCM tools against themselves?

There isn’t space here to address all of Poole’s claims, but at subversion.tigris.org/poole-response.html, we’ve posted a more detailed response, and hope that readers who saw Poole’s original piece will also see our reply.

Karl Fogel Software Collaboration Specialist, CollabNet Developer, Subversion Project


Share this link: http://www.sdtimes.com/link/29106
 

Add comment


Name*
Email*  
Country     


  • Comment
  • Preview
Loading