|
|
|
|
|
|
by fnord123
2019 days ago
|
|
|
But it comes from observing what the Linux community did and giving it a name. It wasn't an ivory tower meditation but a field observation. I don't know how one can then turn around and say that it is not how the model works. Was the original observation incorrect? It might sound like I'm being pernicious but I think fuchsia is great tech and I want it to succeed. I feel compelled to cheer you on in seeing the bazaar model as very real and good thing to pursue. On the topic of more community engagement... despite Zircon not being an outright microkernel, maybe it's still appropriate for someone in the Fuchsia community to submit a talk to the FOSDEM 21 Microkernel devroom https://fosdem.org/2021/schedule/track/microkernel/ |
|
|
When I said "in this regard", the intent was to signal that "bazaar" explicitly doesn't mean an anarchic situation where all change is accepted. It's maybe more anarchic than the cathedral model, but it's controlled anarchy.
The reality is that most projects fall somewhere between the two models. The people most heavily invested in the projects tend to drive change, and this is sometimes at the behest of the community. That doesn't automatically make the project a cathedral.
Similarly, while Google controls the direction and funds the development of Fuchsia, our development process (which we publish on fuchsia.dev in the Governance section) is very much bazaar-like. This is difficult to see because we haven't been open about our processes, and we haven't engaged externally with developers. To that extent, we've been very much "cathedral". This expanded model is us inviting folks to join us in the bazaar.