Talk:The Cathedral and the Bazaar

message: I'm curious - I haven't read this book - but who is the Accidental Revolutionary in the title? One would assume it is Torvalds, but the title reads like it is Raymond. kibibu 07:40, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's definitely ESR (who has a habit of sometimes slightly over-estimating his worth).  I think he is referring to the revolution that his essay caused (including the release of the Netscape source code) and his involvement in the birth of the open-source movement (as distinct from the existing free software movement).  The expression could, of course, equally apply to Torvalds or Stallman.  In fact, I cannot think of a revolutionary in any field who wasn't to some extent accidental. --Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley talk contrib 17:54, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, modesty doesn't appear to be his strong point. Given there was already a Free software movement, perhaps he's more of an accidental evolutionary. kibibu 06:03, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Or maybe it's just hyperbole from the publisher, put on the front of a book to help sell it... --Dilaudid 11:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Title

message: Is it just a load of bolox though?   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.111.60.43 (talk) 08:33, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Bolox

message: We need these documented. I don't mean personal editorialising (as above) - I mean documenting famous criticisms of CatB and its ideas, and criticisms of those criticisms. The First Monday paper (even if it was crap) and reactions to it should be covered, for example. Any others? Famous criticisms by others are needed. (I have an urge to get this article through WP:FAC.) - David Gerard 11:00, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticisms of CatB

message: The work seems to be licensed under an Open Publication license, not a creative commons license.
:"Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Open Publication License, version 2.0." It is. ABoerma 21:59, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: License

message: Or is it just my browser's problem?
AilaG 01:20, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It has to be your browser's problem. I think you have to fix it as I can view the image. --Siva1979Talk to me 01:49, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The pic's gone..? 

message: I don't see the rationale for merging. That the two pieces were sold in a compilation doesn't necessarily mean they're the same thing. Chris Cunningham 18:52, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this article could be expanded to cover the whole book, not just the first essay. The book is already mentioned in the article and the accompanying image. The HtN article is only a stub, and the Revenge of the Hackers article (referenced here) doesn't yet exist. I don't see any reason all the essays can't be described in a single article. Aardvark92 00:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Again, what's the rationale? Length isn't the only grounds for whether an article stands along. CatB is by far the best-known and least contentious of the essays; that the others have short or non-existent articles is more a function of their relative lack of impact on the community than anything else. Chris Cunningham 07:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Don't merge 

message: "The essay helped convince most existing open source and free software projects to adopt Bazaar-style open development models, fully or partially — including GNU Emacs and GCC, the original Cathedral examples. Most famously, it also provided the final push for Netscape Communications Corporation to release the source code for Netscape Communicator and start the Mozilla project."
The above quote is referenced to Eric S. Raymond himself. In my eyes, what he says is probably biased to infinity and as such not proper material for an encyclopedia. I'd even want to remove the reference altogether and insert a . 80.217.188.76 22:50, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While I agree that ESR isn't a reliable source in general, the fledgling Open Source Initiative (when it was basically Raymond and Perens) were pretty closely associated with Mozilla's source release at the time iirc. We may just need a better reference. Chris Cunningham 09:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References?