I've finally gotten around to reading this thread, and I have to confess
that I'm quite puzzled. I'm not necessarily *against* it (not that that
would matter one iota). But I am a bit ... amused.
I have a pretty long history in being involved in commercial software
(particularly compiler) development and having dealt with (and interacted
with) all the various companies and organizations for a number of years --
like even before Borland existed. Anyone remember the Wizard C compiler
and what it became? Anyone remember when the Lattice C compiler was the
Microsoft C compiler? I was working for Lattice at that time (there were
about six of us). And I was involved with the ANSI C Standard committee
(at Lattice and later at SAS) and later the ANSI C++ Standard committee (at
SAS), and I know how standardization works and how collaborations work. So
I don't approach this exactly in a vacuum.
What puzzles me is: What is the benefit of this change? Who profits and
how? This is particulary puzzling when the very first thing that is being
asked is that people turn over all their claims to IP completely gratis.
And all of this is to ensure that wxWindows is "taken seriously by the
industry"? But the evidence is that wxWindows *is* taken seriously by the
industry and it is precisely *because* of this that the new wxWindows
Software Foundation is being created. What it really sounds like -- pardon
my cynicism -- is that Borland really wants to lean heavily on wxWindows
but wants to ensure that it has an "appropriate" degree of control to
ensure its business objectives. Nothing wrong with that, but it ought to
be recognized for what it is. People complain about Microsoft wanting to
exert power and control. Same story, or so it seems. Look at it
objectively. Look at the situation now (control of wxWindows is held by a
loose confederation (?) of developers and interested parties. How will
this change? Control will be held by a "board" of a "software foundation".
You know, it's just not clear what "problem" this solves. It's clear that
Borland will profit from this (through being able to immediately exert much
more direct control -- through the board -- over wxWindows). It's not
clear who else will profit from this -- the "answers" in the FAQ are simply
not very convincing. In the world of quid pro quo, there seems to be a lot
of quid but no obvious quo in this move.
And note that I haven't even speculated on what may or may not be going on
behind the scenes, or how things could change in the future. Well, let's
get just a little paranoid -- since I just skimmed the bylaws. It looks as
though the Board of Directors wields complete power. How are members of
the Board replaced and how are vacancies filled? By vote of the Board.
What are the rights and powers of "other members"? Golly, I don't see any.
Maybe I missed this. So ....... What in the bylaws prevents Borland (or
some other company -- say Microsoft) from hiring all members of the Board
and thus wielding complete control in the business interests of a single
company? I just don't see anything prohibiting this. I don't see any
clause to the effect that "no more than x% of board members may be in the
employ of or compensated by a single company, its subsidiaries, partners,
or associates". In the FAQ the claim is made that the Foundation could not
be "hijacked by commercial interests" because "the board will always have a
majority of its members from the wxWindows development community". But I
don't see anything in the bylaws that ensures this. The concept of
"development community" does not appear anywhere in the bylaws. For all
the bylaws say, the board could be completely composed of used car salesmen
from Toledo. Have I missed something here? And even if a majority of the
board is composed of wxWindows developers, what is to prohibit all of
those developers from being empolyed by a single commercial interest?
Oh, well. I'm sure this is a "good thing". It's just that the
"justification" of it is so hideously disingenuous. As I say, a bit
amusing at the very least. Especially so since I don't really buy into the
"open source" idea all that much to begin with. I'd be pretty happy to buy
wxPython from Borland. I've always had a very high degree of respect for
their products. I think they're great. But it's nice at least to be
honest and know when you're being jacked up. It's quite a coup for Borland
if they can manage to achieve control of wxWindows while not paying for
this and getting to use the results for free. Wow. Virtually no
investment coupled with virtually infinite return on investment. I'm
really getting to be too old and cynical.
···
--------------------------------------
Gary H. Merrill
Director and Principal Scientist, New Applications
Data Exploration Sciences
GlaxoSmithKline Inc.
(919) 483-8456