Moderator: Moderator Team
and ROS was the second operating system mentioned in the list.8 Best Alternative Operating Systems You Can Install
KolibriOS seems interesting too.perseus wrote:I found this article on Silicon India News (http://www.siliconindia.com/news/enterp ... cid-7.html). The article discussesand ROS was the second operating system mentioned in the list.8 Best Alternative Operating Systems You Can Install
It is encouraging to see ROS discussed on the web in this manner and it reminds us of the great potential hidden in this promising gem of an operating system.
Yes, I know, I checked the comments afterwards. Guess it can't be helped, but it just makes you wonder why/on what basis they decide such things. I mean, as said, Kolibrios did get it, and it's also an alternative OS. It's of little help if you want to know the reasons and they just tell you everything was great but there are other reasons. Well, what are those other reasons, then?vicmarcal wrote:Well, being or not in GSOC is just a Google decision.
In the meeting after the rejection, the Google Team explains which are the reasons behind not letting you go into(you missed this or that), however basically they told us "You did a great job, all is perfect, but because other reasons we can't accept you this year".
On the other hand, seems we are able to fundraise instead requesting Google. It's just a matter of work.
That's not entirely true. I've been running ROS on real hardware for quite some time now.Jessey wrote:why is reactos 2nd and behind haiku. Haiku is the best on that list, no offense but haiku runs on real hardware, hell most of them run on real hardware, but not react os so it should be dead last.
I'm not following you there. With a summer of code, it's the one organising it that lends time/money out to *other* organisations and projects. If we held a SOC, thus, we would be wasting our very limited resources (we're not google, after all) to other projects. If you're talking about spending our own money on ourselves, well, that's just normal practise and is as we're doing already now. As a project, it's WE that would benefit from the SOC of SOMEONE ELSE.PurpleGurl wrote:On funding, it seems we could have our own summer of code (though preferably under another name).
Again, organising a SOC, in the spirit of GSOC, means we'll sponsor *other* projects. And I don't know of any outside SOC specially for women. And besides... I'm not really for that kind of 'specific target audience' thing. It reminds me of the law that was passed a few years ago in my country, obliging political parties, businesses and what not to be forced to have a certain percentage of women. I mean, I'm all for equality, but, as some feminists have rightfully pointed out, mandatory quota's of women is actually *against* the principle of being regarded equal. It's positive discrimination, except that is a contradictio in terminis.Keep in mind, GSOC is not the only internship promotion program out there. There is also one that is specifically for girls/women. I think some lady coders could help the community culture around here. It has gotten much better over the years, and the interactions in the boards are less critical and snippy. I guess the credit goes to the leadership as well as those who decided to be a part of the solution. I applaud that. Moving on, agreeing to host a female coding event could generate code and revenue. The key is finding what sponsors exist, and if we can comfortably fit within their agendas. If, for instance, some group wanted to pay companies and non-profits to get LGBT people more coding experience, I wouldn't care (despite my personal views) since people would be coding and helping us.
It's fundamentally different. The money of the fundraiser IS our money. We would have that with or without a GSOC. The GSOC would have given additional 'sponsorship' (in coding ability), however. The major part of our own money goes to our servers and such. I think. Can't be sure, because, as said, there is a huge deficit in transparency in this regard. But anyway, GSOCs help not only in immediate return, but also in getting some new blood interested. And for almost nothing (viewed from our perspective). The target audience too, is fundamentally different. They are students, who put their summer time in it. They get 'student wages' but it counts for their curriculum and have nothing better to do at that time. Whereas, when we want to hire someone, the pay is got to be reasonable, certainly if it's meant as a full time job, and not for only a few months or during the weekends. So you can't get as many people compared to GSOC personnel. With a yearly fundraising of 25000 euro, you have just enough to pay for one IT'er for one year, in my country. And even then he'll be underpaid. Using that money for 24 students for 2 months, would basically be a waste of the money. But if you get 4 from GSOC, it's still a welcome addition.Speaking of our goals. Considering how GSOC works the last time I read on their site, where half of their spending goes to the organization, and half to the intern coders, lets look in terms of the last fundraiser. That would be enough to fund 24 people for the same length of time and terms as GSOC. I am not suggesting anything, just throwing that up for comparison sake (unless my math or understanding is off, and I was rounding).
Of all the other OSes I think Haiku, Kolibri and AROS are the most interesting, viewed from an IT-tinkering stance and an 'unknown/rare'-feeling.And I like the idea behind Kolibrios. It doesn't do much and doesn't have library dependencies and all of that. I know I've been shot down repeatedly, but once the project reaches a somewhat finalized state, I'd like to see a fine-tuned, optimized version with the most critical and bottleneck sections written in tight hand-coded assembly (where feasible -if a C/C++ compiler does better, then go with it). I'd like to see multiple code paths where machines that are not compatible can run the standard stuff. Or another idea is to have an unofficial service pack to replace what files that would be compatible, and the ability to roll it back at any time. But these are pipe dreams.
With the 'alternative' OSes, we're usually always mentioned in the top 5.Back to the topic, I am glad to see we are getting positive press. Now if we could only get more funds and more coders with the relevant skill-sets.
Temper, temper.EmuandCo wrote:If you have such a big problem with reactos... why don't you just leave? Ever tried to clone something with almost no use able information? Don't think so
https://www.reactos.org wrote:ReactOS 0.3.16 is still in alpha stage, meaning it is not feature-complete and is recommended only for evaluation and testing purposes.
There is not much to follow. We can raise the funds and hire our qualifying interns for the same length and way as GSOC would do it. I didn't say waste our funds on OTHER projects. No, we act as our OWN private "SOC" to bring in NEW coders. Google not only funds projects, but they send interns, and we could do this in-house. We could raise the funds for us and pay FRESH interns out of that to help us, just like Google would do for us.Webunny wrote:I'm not following you there. With a summer of code, it's the one organising it that lends time/money out to *other* organisations and projects. If we held a SOC, thus, we would be wasting our very limited resources (we're not google, after all) to other projects. If you're talking about spending our own money on ourselves, well, that's just normal practise and is as we're doing already now. As a project, it's WE that would benefit from the SOC of SOMEONE ELSE.PurpleGurl wrote:On funding, it seems we could have our own summer of code (though preferably under another name).
Again, I mean an in-house summer of coding program specifically for ROS - organized by us, and FOR us. Instead of counting on GSOC to raise the funds, we do that ourselves. Then we can sponsor promising coders who are not already a part of the project, and try to groom them to be ROS devs. Maybe they go onto work for some IT company, using us as a job reference and experience, and they help us in their free time once we earn their loyalty. If they make big in life, they might even pull strings to help us, whether it is install ROS in a corporate environment, send coders our way, or send funds. That is not implausible since large companies already have a huge OS budget, so it seems they'd be willing to send donations which are a fraction of Windows costs.Again, organising a SOC, in the spirit of GSOC, means we'll sponsor *other* projects. And I don't know of any outside SOC specially for women. And besides... I'm not really for that kind of 'specific target audience' thing. It reminds me of the law that was passed a few years ago in my country, obliging political parties, businesses and what not to be forced to have a certain percentage of women. I mean, I'm all for equality, but, as some feminists have rightfully pointed out, mandatory quota's of women is actually *against* the principle of being regarded equal. It's positive discrimination, except that is a contradictio in terminis.
Exactly. However, if programs like OPW (Outreach Program for Women) are willing to send us female interns on their dime, I feel we should apply. Like I said, we don't have to agree with whatever agenda or underlying premise. Just accept their funds and the coders they send, so long as they are honest, competent, and dependable.What *does* need to happen, is that the state has to make sure the starting conditions and opportunities are alike. Granted, this is not always the case and should be worked on. Compulsory quota's are the easy way out and remain discriminatory to a person who maybe was better suited or got more votes, but wasn't of the right gender. What's next? A mandatory quota of persons with a disability? Of black people? People from Maghreb origins? Asians? Homosexuals? Lesbians? People with red hair?
...
Here too, the only criteria should be how well people can and do code on ROS. Whether they are female or male is completely irrelevant to it.
No it is not different in the way I meant things. What I am proposing is similar, just that WE raise the funds and hire our own student coders like GSOC sends us the funds and hires student coders for us. That is fundamentally the same thing. Like GSOC, if we did the same thing for ourselves in-house, we would have fresh blood. That was the ENTIRE point of what I posted before. I was only speaking of how to have the same effects of GSOC but without Google, and yes, it is much like we are doing with GHz and other coders, but I just said to do it more like GSOC where we'd have fresh blood. While GSOC is a blessing, they are not indispensable.It's fundamentally different. The money of the fundraiser IS our money. We would have that with or without a GSOC. The GSOC would have given additional 'sponsorship' (in coding ability), however. The major part of our own money goes to our servers and such. I think. Can't be sure, because, as said, there is a huge deficit in transparency in this regard. But anyway, GSOCs help not only in immediate return, but also in getting some new blood interested. And for almost nothing (viewed from our perspective). The target audience too, is fundamentally different. They are students, who put their summer time in it. They get 'student wages' but it counts for their curriculum and have nothing better to do at that time. Whereas, when we want to hire someone, the pay is got to be reasonable, certainly if it's meant as a full time job, and not for only a few months or during the weekends. So you can't get as many people compared to GSOC personnel. With a yearly fundraising of 25000 euro, you have just enough to pay for one IT'er for one year, in my country. And even then he'll be underpaid. Using that money for 24 students for 2 months, would basically be a waste of the money. But if you get 4 from GSOC, it's still a welcome addition.
They send interns to, and fund OTHER projects. That's exactly my point. A GSOC is not meant for oneself, but for other projects. Google doesn't put the GSOC interns to use on their own projects nor do they use their GSOC budget on themselves, they let *other* organisations apply for their SOC. What you are describing is just hiring people, which, indeed, is pretty self-evident, but has little to do with a GSOC.No, we act as our OWN GSOC to OURSELF, but bring in NEW coders. That is what Google does, not only do they fund projects, but they send interns. But we could do this in-house.
In that part of the post, I was speaking on the principle of the matter. It was a philosophical and society-critical aside, but one that would be clear, I assumed.As for my comments on outside GSOC-like programs, I was saying that we should apply to all the ones that exist. I wasn't saying to change any laws or agree with any agendas, but to take advantage of sponsorships by such organizations.
Agreed. It would be a waste not trying to get sponsorship of whatever comes along (with whatever personal agenda they have), as long as it doesn't infringe on our primary objectives.Exactly. However, if programs like OPW (Outreach Program for Women) are willing to send us female interns on their dime, I feel we should apply.
You better name it something entirely different, then. A SOC in the sense of a GSOC gives the impression that it is similar, after all. Spending the money with the concept of letting OTHER organisations apply and sponsor THEIR projects you think interesting, is something entirely else (at least as a concept) then hiring your own devs for yourselves.vicmarcal wrote:Ey!Thanks guys!
Cool ideas here
Anyone willing to actively help?
I think it's a great idea to check others GSOC alternatives, but also our own GSOC.
Any small helper is really appreciated
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Google [Bot] and 2 guests
![[ external image ]](http://reactos.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/reactostesterusertranslator.gif){kind=link}