This is my resumé in french.
February 9, 2006
New WikiHowTo project started with new ides combining good parts from me, ZyMos and Inyuki.
The project is open for new contributors from wikipedia, etc.
January 17, 2006
In response to the email sent to me by Inyuki asking how did i came up with the idea of Wikisolutions and guidelines in the HowTo project hosted at wikicities (en.howto.wikicities.com).
That’s a long story. First i was using Windows, like everyone. The Windows world is simple. You have a few operating systems (actualy it is only one with various verssions). There is at any time one that is the best (XP right now). Once you install it you nead to clean it, turn off everythink because it is anoying. You must do this manually.
Actually you do turn off everything:
- turn of the XP super-advanced skin to the classical skin (this is the reason there are only two skins, so you can turn it off if you are not crazy with the new skin)
- turn off msn, because you don’t use it.
- turn off the left bar on windows expplorer
- turn off many other… (there are laways things to turn off)
Once you finished with this you turn off other anoyances:
- turn off the viruses by installing norton antivirus and zone alarm and configure them
- install winamp and stop using medai player
- install realplayer, etc..
Actually you do all this when you don’t like how your computer works. You don’t like how you see photos, you install ACDSee.
Actualy you do this manualy, no automatic script is used. What seems easy is that you do not have a will, you do not nead to “think”. You just “react”.
Windows IS React OS, belive me. React OS ‘s name is not a reactinary name, it is the real name of Windows…
What makes you do all this things MANUALY, is that you do not nead to think. You react to publicity, graphical interface, when something works wrong. I know a little psychology, and i tell you that any psychologist will tell you: it is more easy not to think, but to react to problems. It gives you the impression that everythink you do manualy is the exception, and that most of the time windows is perfect.
From time to time Windows crashed. I mean, not like every-day windows-crash. But like every year windows-super-crash. Ok, i must react to this! I will install it again. Reconfigure it, reinstall software, etc…. Hopefully personal data is ok. But, my settings were also personal, i worked for them.
One day i switched to linux. I knew nothink about linux, excepting a few commands (cp, cd and ls only with no arguments from the university). Since i am not someone who chooses the easy way, i went directly for Gentoo linux. i downloaded the network install, and i printed all the installation instructions. Actually this was a little similar with linux. Of course, more technical, but still it was a lot of reacting.
Beofre installing gentoo, i installed windows on the first partition, and configured it a little. After 12 howers i was able to install the base gentoo… I learned a lot of things. Then there was a long time to compile everythink. Anyway, i did something else in the meantime.
When i started windows again it super-crashed. The partition was ok, but it still did not liked my linux. This was the first time i realised i don’t nead to react any more.
I configured linux, and used it with KDE. I completly forgot i neaded to install windows. After 2 months i finlay formated me windows partition and abandoned the idea to reinstalll windows again, not because i did not liked windows any more, but because i was so AFRAID it will screw my new linux that was working so well…
I used gentoo more than one year. It was perfect. I switched to Debian Sarge testing (witch i agree, with my new experience was MUCH more easy to install than gentoo), not because gentoo had any problem, but because i just wanted to try something else. I was double-booting gento and debian for some time, even if i was able to import all the settings from gentoo to debian… I switched to ion3 for the desktop, and it is more easy to use (not to configure).
I was lucky my windows super-crashed on me on that day. This was a blessing!
If you wait for something to happend before you decide to switch OS, switch blogging software, switch office suite, switch messenger client, switch browser, switch everything, then switch from KDE to ion3…. I happened for me, but for most people it will never happend.
When i finished all this i had a LOOOOOOT of links in my bookmarks. Because links are easy to collect.
Now, back to the problem. How whould mister X do what i did, especially if he is not going to be a computer professional? Mister X will continue to react, and this will make him swith from windows explorer to firefox.
And then, when i look at Ubuntu, that is sooo well done. It works sooo well. Mister X will never switch to Ubuntu, because he will only react to individual problems, and will never blame Windows for his problems…
The idea was to use all the links i had to help anyone make any switch he wants. From KDE to ion2. From java to python. etc….
Mister X wants solutions for his problems. He will not find the solutions by reacting. He will find this solutions by going to Wikisolutions….
This way, Wikisolutions will help Mister X to stop react localy to problems, too see all the solutions, to know by reading wikisolution what each solution can bring to him, and to know that even if he does not know everything, he will always be able to go to Wikisolutions and find the good solution for him on the short term , long term, etc…, not the reactionary one.
This is why each solution must fit to the neads of Mister X (some may want a short term solution , other along term solution…). This is why there are guidelines.
This is the story about Wikisolutions.
Have a nice day with HowTo!
January 15, 2006
December 19, 2005
The model described here is somehow wrong. The model says that every developper that makes an enhancement will go and sell that enhencement to someone, than go back and give some money to the original author. It does not understand the “bazaar” style that makes free software developpement a better one.
What about the poor guy who submit a bug, and does not touch the source code. Or the guy that try to compile the program on his/her gentoo (insert your distribution)?
This model will eventualy work but will never compete with bazaar-style. Not untill the product expires and become 100% free…
Actualy what i suggest instead is to think about a way that put pressure on the user, not on the developper.
A few modificaions:
- replace the author with the leader; The idea of a leader is that of a person who coordinate the others, while the leader does not always write the majority of the code. It is the leader who must pay the developpers, not the developpers who must pay the leader; The leader will be some kind of PayPal. Please note that the leader must be a single company/person, and it shoud not develop the software itself all the time. The leader should be the one that takes the money from customers and that pays the developpers (maybe by email). I do not wory much about trusting the leader, since developpers will come and contribute on he basis of trust.
- The problem is not how to pay the developpers, but how to make the users pay. This is the real problem, since users do not want to pay unless they are forced by law. (well, excepting donators). I think there are two kind of distribution:- distributing the software as a program to instal; – distributing the software inside a distribution. The seccond one is almost the only one to consider in the free software world. It means we nead to subscribe to a repostory.
- those who make the repositories (packagers) will select a list of software they consider usefull and not too expensive.
- those who work for a woftware project (original developers) will choose a project where the money is distributed the best way
- users/customers will choose a repository depending on whitch type of software they want, the price, etc…
- the project will become free after some time that is included in the licence; to fork a project before it becomes 100% free means you will pay a certain amount of money to the leader of the original project. You will actualy be a new leader of a new project. This is somehow closer to the model proposed in the article, but the diference is that anyone can make a fork at any time.
- Who is developper and who is not should be decided democraticaly by all the other developpers, and the leader should have a veto from time to time to reject some developpers when the developper is supposed to be an important client. A developper will have a password to write the cvs repositories. Everyone who paid a subscription fee directly or throug a forked project shoud be able to read the cvs of course…
- The developpers of a forked project should be counted as users for the original project and the leaders of the forked projects should be counted as multiple users. The leader should pay even for each developper, unless the developpers are/were recently also developpers of the original project. In this case they do not have to pay for software that they had access to while they were developers. If they are no longer developers they will have to pay only for software that was produced after they lost the status of developper in the original project.
THE LICENCE
A software is considered as almost free but business-oriented if:
- it will expire and become completly free after a resonable amount of time (not more than a few years)
- it is always distributed with full source code availiable for free to anyone witch is a user/developper/leader.
- if you are a user:
- it means you have paid for the software
- you have the right to modify and use the program and the modified program
- you HAVE the right to disribute the modified version to someone else and you become automaticaly a leader of project
- if you are a leader of project:
- you must know how many people use your software and you must pay to the original leader (if it is not only you) the number of money coresponding to the amount of people until the licence becomes free
- you must give the rest of the money to the developpers to decide what to to with them. (This is the part that is close to PayPal). Actualy it is the leader who decides, but i think it is better for the leader to let the developers vote.
- you have the right to make the new product licence to expire later than the original copy of course (never sooner)… and to charge as much as you want for it (usualy more than the original unless you loose money)
- if you are a developper
- you have the right to use, modify and submit changes to the project leader for free. Your have he right to participate in the democtatic voting process that will distrbiute the money, and if you don’t agree on how the money are distributed, you have the folowing right:
- if you want to distribute the software you modify, you have the right to do so, and you become a project leader with all the obligations of a leader.
- you may be at the same time a leader of a forked project and a developper of the original project
Finaly, a leader of a project may just be a computer program. And it is as well possible to imagine a single company behind many pojects, even for forked and competing products, because the competition is not the same as in proprietary software: it goes in the same direction, not in oposite directions.
Who may be a leader of a forked project?
- a real fork, but this should not hapend offten
- gentoo linux, mandriva, other repositories
- HP, Compaq, Dell who sell the software pre-installed
- a single company that wants to produce a customised version for own use. It will pay the number of copies and it may decide to:
- “sell” it back to the original project. Actualy to sell it back, the original project developpers should agree to include this company as developer for some time. As a developer, the new company can merge all changes into the original project and then use the software for free. The new company may actualy even recive some money back for the work, if the developers vote for that.
- The company can re-distribute the software as a real fork, if they do not want to become developers of the original project.. in this case they become leaders of a new forked project and will pay the original project for each copy they sell (or that they give to their own developers!).
All this rights should be included in the licence… excepting the right on how developers will be paid witch is based on trust and/or a contract more than on the copyright licence.
Eventualy a contract may be signed between the leader and the developers, but this is very diffiult to do. (just look at PayPal) and useless in the bazaar style since contributors are not employees. It is impossible to employ people from all over the world for a limitd amount of time because there is no legal way to do it easily on the hole world without having offices in each country. The system must be based on trust most of the time.
VARIATION:
Instead of setting only the time when the software will become free, leaders may act like a voting machine, and each developer will say how much he wants to recive. If the leader (or the community of developers) agree, then it will be included in the price of the product.
The leader may then decide that the product will become 100% free after enaught money have been obtained to pay each developer. Lets say they will say, after 10000 copies sold, the software is free (or after some time, witch comes first).
More complex systems could say: the first 100 copies are more expensve, then the next 1000 less expensive, etc…
For example, who will buy the first 100 copies?
- gentoo, debian, redhat, etc: they nead it in order to let the packgers work on packages. They will wayt for the 100 copis to be sold then they will consider the next 1000 when they release a new version of the distribution. Actualy the 100 expensive licences were only used for their own staff (the package developpers)
Resources:
