Ashwin DixitA million eyes is a metaphor, from Eric S. Raymond's famous saying, "Under a million eyeballs, all bugs are shallow."
If lots of people use the GIMP, it gets more eyeballs, naturally.
Pope Bob the Unsane@purrperl absolutely. A percentage of the Gimp users would lend time to code-review.
The problem we are also facing is that most people don't want to lend their eyes for free, even if the software is free.
But that issue is a whole other ball of wax.
1. Not all people are programmers /documentation writers etc.
So they couldn't contribute to the repo easily, even with the will to.
2. The #FOSS ecosystem was deliberately kept fragmented, hyped as hard-to-use, out of the hands of the average user by closed source barons. With easy mechanisms to contribute something even as simple as bug reports, FOSS thrives.
3. The real asset is attention, which was used up by chasing everyday needs. Meet needs, unleash a flood of attention.
@purrperl in my experience, people become programmers and documentation writers when they partake in the development process.
That was definitely true in the past. Yet, a unified distro with proper PR, advertising, user education, and outreach, makes it fun and easy for people to contribute to each #FOSS project. So people feel empowered to do their civic duty, and make software better for all.
"I'm doing my part!"
~ Starship Troopers.
This looks like a job for me. 😃
@purrperl what you seem to want to do is somehow bring all open source projects under the same roof with some sort of hierarchy to manage the code-bases.
Am I following this properly?
Better resource utilization.
Convergence rather than fragmentation.
Freedom from the closed source FUD of the past.
Dare I say it, one distro to rule them all. 🙂
If you say, "I've got some software you can use, but you have to pay me to use it, and I won't show you the source code, and I decide how you can use it, and you have to update it at my schedule, and upgrades to next versions are not free, and there's always paranoia about security.", you would be laughed out of town.
@purrperl so it'd be like GitHub, but every commit would need 1,000,000 approvals from various 'members' of the site? What would stop someone from hosting their own project / site, and offering commits after 250,000 approvals, In the name of speeding up development?
It's Free as usual.
Say Codeberg, rather than some proprietary git host.
Nothing prevents people from forking off projects, and experimenting.
In fact, it is welcomed!
However, those forked packages won't be trusted, only the mainline packages.
If a fork is ever to make it into the trusted main branch, it will have to undergo the same rigorous audit.
@purrperl I think all of that works against the strong reason open source has seen the success it has, which is its anarchistic nature.
Centralizing all projects under one roof seems like a good idea until that roof falls down.
"Roof falls down" ? How so?
Anarchism just means no authorities.
Democracy is Anarchism in Government.
Science is Anarchism in Knowledge.
Art is Anarchism is Aesthetics.
Random experimentation with code, starting from scratch, or from a fork of the Free Software mainline remains free as ever, and is encouraged.
@purrperl well, who is operating the website that hosts all of this, how is it being paid for, is its code also subject to arduous examination?
Anarchism eschews hierarchies of all kinds wherever they are not justifiable.
Deliberately placing onerous restrictions on projects of all sizes seems extreme and would need some serious justifying.
Where is the hierarchy?
We have been brainwashed with the idea that "anarchy" is a bad word.
Say "anarchy" to the average person, and their mind emotionally pulls up images of rampant lawlessness, looting, arson, vandalism, murder, rape and robbery in the streets.
A True Democracy really is an Anarchism.
As Alan Moore said, what happens in an Anarchism, is that the most powerful faction takes over. And that is what happened in the Untied Snakes of Armored Cars. With good PR.
@purrperl where is the hierarchy: Who decides on a million eyes per commit? Who has the authority to change that number? Where does that number come from?
Again, you have seized upon the million eyes as a literal number.
A small group of core maintainers runs Linux and has definite authority over what goes in.
In the new model, even their power is dissipated. It's more programmatic and democratic.
@purrperl ok, so explain to me how you would "change" the way Linux is developed to move it to this new model. Help me understand the benefit of your new model versus how things are in the present.
It's a priming / bootstrapping problem to transition. It takes land-based vehicle to tow an engine-less glider and generate the lift to get it off the ground. Once launched, it can cruise on thermal currents, and solar energy, practically indefinitely.
In the new model, the current core programmers, whom we deem to be honest, code up a mechanism setting up a number of sign-offs required for new code to make the final cut. That number becomes subject to the same audit process.
@purrperl "whom we deem to be honest" who is we, and how do we deem them to be honest?
"We the People...", means everybody.
GNU/Linux wasn't born yesterday.
There's a sizable crowd of people behind it.
They all trust it.
Once the new decentralized model is up and running, it is radically transparent and democratic.
People in the continent of North Vespuccia didn't choose to become a democracy ( republic ).
It took a cohort of slaveholders to declare themselves the Founding Fathers ( Mack Daddies with slave girls to entertain them in their private quarters. 😂 )
@purrperl ok, so you me, and all the other Linux fans out there get to go through the commit logs and axe a bunch of developers, and remove them from the Linux project?
Who said anything about removing anyone?
It's the Linux OGs giving love to the street, handing over their co-creation to the people.
Helping people unify, empower themselves, and become involved easily.
Nobody is axed or excluded.
Code is code. Contributors cannot be smeared and shunned.
Anyone can commit, even if they are an unpopular human, a 🤖 , an 👽 , or something else.
"Hey, did you hear that RMS is a creep, and ESR is a pervert?"
"A study funded by Microsoft found that most Open Source developers have unresolved issues." 😂
@purrperl everyone _CAN_ currently commit and make changes to a local clone of the kernel source code.
Whether their patches are approved is up to existing developers of the Linux kernel project.
Yes, and it was fragmented into distros, mired in confusion.
One repo, one distro mainline, one audit pipeline, one easy way to report bugs.
@purrperl what was fragmented into distros and mired in confusion?
Are you saying Debian and RedHat maintain their own forks of the kernel?
@purrperl what is your issue with https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html ?
My issue is that Linux was for and by nerds.
The new Linux is more akin to macOS, beautiful eye-candy, elegant design, except Free.
@purrperl oh. You aren't complaining about the "new Linux"...
What are your issues with the eye-candy heavy desktop environments like KDE and Cinnamon?
The problem was that they were "too customizable".
macOS did not ask you to choose a Window Manager & Desktop out of the box.
The Golden Path, "just worked".
Linux required you to know a lot to be workable.
You could make it laden with eyecandy, or use something as spartan as fvwm.
In the new Linux ( working title: Red Gnome ), the Golden Path just works out of the box, without asking thorny questions of the user.
The choice is not either/or:
https://rant.li/ashwin/apple
@purrperl when was the last time you explored a few different distributions' installation processes?
Since 1995, I have distro-hopped, ( Yggdrasil, Slackware, SuSE, Red Hat, Mint, Ubuntu, even OpenSolaris, FreeBSD & OpenBSD etc. ), and finally settled on Debian+GNOME, which is less customizable than KDE, therefore less confusing.
Now, I am drawn to nixOS, except I'd like to nix the nix language.
@purrperl Linux in 1995 was very different from Linux in 2025.
Have you installed Linux Mint recently? Or Ubuntu? Or Fedora?
The Linux install process from 1995 was DRAMATICALLY different from the install process today.
Much like installing Windows in 1995 had a different feel than installing it today.
@purrperl here's my proposal to you: start your own Linux distribution.
ONLY include open source projects that have the required rigorous commit approval you are looking for and deem 'safe'.
Make your installer just automatically blast away the partition and install the desktop environment YOU think is
"The Best(tm)" and make it extremely polished with others' help.
Whatever your issue is with Debian or whatever other distro you've tried -- do it differently and fix it.
@purrperl "Think Different" to quote someone or other.
@purrperl let me also point out that the reason macOS and Windows are as popular as they are is because those are what students in school and kids that first interact with a computer experience.
The reason it is the first thing they experience is because Microsoft and Apple have tremendous amount of money to throw at that problem and put things in schools to indoctrinate children.
As such you have a society where fewer people grow up around a computer that is running linux, and you get fewer people that know linux, which means there are fewer teachers to advocate for linux in the classroom.
It is not because they are "easy" to install. It is because any computer someone buys from a major manufacturer comes with either macOS or Windows installed for them.
In the realm of advertising Windows and macOS are Coke and Pepsi, while linux is RC Cola. I fucking LOVE RC Cola,
Apple is like going to a fine Sushi restaurant, 🍣 where everything is arranged thoughtfully, you are welcomed in, the Chef is very polite, and sushi is served nicely arranged on a platter for you to appreciate and gobble down with ease.
Linux is like someone throwing you a fishing rod, 🎣 hook, line, and sinker. Go fish. Clean it, and cook it however you like. Good luck. You want to really learn how to fish? Hang out with the experienced fishermen — curmudgeonly, salty sea dogs.
@purrperl what's wrong with that?
At that rate, we will never have The Year of Linux on the Desktop.
That's all. That's what I am addressing.
@purrperl it's been the year of Linux on the desktop for over 20 years for me. I'm perfectly fine with Linux as a desktop.
It's been "The Year of Linux on the Desktop" ( a silly joke with rolling eyes 🙄 ) for 20 years now.
Let's really fuckin' make it so.
You may be fine with Linux as a desktop, and so are many other techies.
Yet, it remains hard to use, and not user-friendly and inviting.
Let's solve the problem for everybody, not just us nerds.
@purrperl how does it remain hard to use? What are you having problems with?
Ok, now I am sensing that you are being disingenuous. 😜
Or maybe I am mistaken. Maybe like most Linux geeks, you just don't see why it is hard for grandma to use. The same lady who can use a macOS for her purposes, without knowing how to configure tons of stuff. Even macOS is too complicated, since it's more like the Expert mode described above. Dev mode in the new distro ( call it LinuxSushi ) will be even more streamlined. Grandma should never have to configure stuff.
@purrperl it is hard for grandma to use because she doesn't do much with a computer, grew up before computers -- even Apple ][s -- were in classrooms, and has no idea what a bit or byte is.
@purrperl to imagine that grandma has _no_ problems or issues using macOS is ludicrous.
LinuxSushi will be better than macOS.
macOS combines what I call User mode and Expert mode.
LinuxSushi will make the Golden Path dead simple.