DConf 2013 Closing Keynote: Quo Vadis by Andrei Alexandrescu

[John Colvin]

On Thursday, 27 June 2013 at 13:18:01 UTC, Joakim wrote:
> As I said earlier, I'm done with this debate.
>
> There is no point talking to people who make blatantly ignorant 
> statements like, "Binary blobs are the exception rather than 
> the rule in Linux, and many hardware vendors would flat out say 
> 'no' to doing any support on them."  This assertion is so 
> ignorant of the facts, it's laughable. :) I have no idea what 
> to make of Iain's talking about gdc or that it is a "one-man 
> team" in response to my prediction that ldc could go 
> closed/paid and obsolete dmd: there is absolutely no connection 
> between the topics.
>
> As for Luca's long response, it is filled with basic mistakes, 
> silly and incorrect rehashes of material already covered, or 
> trivial twits, like the fact that D has a spec but isn't 
> standardized by any international body.  For example, I 
> originally pointed out several examples of other projects with 
> existing commercial models and I was told that they're not 
> "closed."  I responded that I never said that they were all 
> closed, only commercial, and I'm now told that since my 
> proposed model for D is closed, I'm "misstating" myself. (Slaps 
> head)
>
> These responses seem written by people who have a very tenuous 
> grasp on the text I wrote.
>
> Look, I get it, you guys are religious zealots- you tip your 
> hand when you allude to ethical or moral reasons for using open 
> source, a crazy idea if there ever was one- and you will come 
> up with all kinds of silly arguments in the face of 
> overwhelming evidence that _pure_ open source has failed.  
> Instead, you claim success when hybrid models bring more open 
> source into the world, then nonsensically reverse course and 
> claim that either they aren't actually hybrid or that such 
> hybrid models are not really "open source," that it's a lie to 
> call it that. (Slaps head again)
>
> I'm not trying to convince you zealots.  You want to keep 
> banging your heads against the wall for the greater glory of 
> your religion, have fun with that.
>
> I'm simply putting forward a case for D going the route of the 
> most successful projects these days, by using a hybrid model, 
> with a unique variation that I came up with :) and have 
> successfully used for a project of my own.
>
> Those who aren't religious about _pure_ open source can 
> consider what I've proposed and my evidence and see if it makes 
> sense to them.

Most replies to you have been quite measured and reasonable. I'm 
not sure what justifies you calling people zealots.