Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Seebs, post: 4026899"] They might be hard to apply, but consider that a great deal of free software is written without idiots saying "you need to get this done sooner so we can book revenue this quarter to please shareholders". It's also often written by particularly good developers, who care about their code. It is also probably an influence that free software writers expect the code itself to get feedback, not just the behavior of the application. I have submitted bug reports about poorly-expressed code, not just about code which didn't work. Again, I don't think there's actually any force driving that. The benefits of well-written software are significant enough that it is likely worth it to some people to improve software they have access to, and if it's worth it to them to do that, it costs them virtually nothing to release the improvements. Free software often ends up with the best efforts of hundreds of skilled programmers, with active filtering in place to keep badly-written code from sneaking in. If you are implying that CC is actually usable to you, that marks a first in my experience. No one else I've known has ever found it preferable to any of the open source tools, of which git is probably currently the most elegant. Another issue is that, if you give away open source software, people can modify it. If you modify my code, and your modification is not itself buggy, and my code is not itself buggy, but your modification causes some part of my code not to work as expected, whose fault is that? This kind of thing is a lot more complicated with code than it is with physical objects. You don't have a million people using a bridge, and a couple hundred thousand of them are using the bridge recompiled for sports cars, and another couple hundred thousand are running it with a third-party tollbooth extension. -s [/QUOTE]

Verification