Bodhi Linux Developer Retires

( Image Credit: Michelangelo's The Creation of Adam )

The solo developer of Bodhi Linux has announced his retirement.

I sincerely wish +Jeff Hoogland  well.  It's not difficult to appreciate that putting together a truly polished Linux Distro is hard, but by one developer, it seems almost an impossible task.  

One Mr. Hoogland set out to do so and I will say that by all accounts he has been a success.  Bodhi Linux has always been a 'standout' Distribution in my view and well respected.  Bodh Linux's level of consistency typically requires a rank and file of workers to make for polish, fit, finish and seamless processes.  Bodhi Linux has become perhaps the best known lightweight Linux Distro.  CrunchBang is perhaps the only other true contender in this category.

Yet, I fear that we will see more of this attrition and with increased frequency.

As geopolitical events unfold and the global economy gets worse by the day, it becomes increasingly difficult for the individual to merely 'exist', much less, do voluntary work on a project of this magnitude.

Yes, if you are lucky, another developer will pick up and continue with Bodhi maintenance.  If you aren't, well, that is the nature of things in today's world.

Linux on the Desktop is much like a garden, if you will.  It requires true dedication, constant attention and nurturing.  Looking at Distrowatch, one sees a wide array of choices.  Some flowers in the garden are hardy, and even perennial flowering all year round giving manifold benefits to the Linux User community.

Indeed, there is much freedom of choice.  But with choice comes risk.  One such risk is that many Distros by default create newcomer confusion.  The immediate question becomes, "Which one is best?"  All one need do is ask and there will be no shortage of opinion offered to help out.  Getting answers to questions with Linux has always been one of its cornerstones and those who maintain support forums are there to help.  This has always been one of the great benefits of Linux.  That hasn't changed.

What has changed?  The pure number of Distros has grown as more developers obtain toolchains which facilitate cloning their own 'me too' Distro.  This is done mostly with good intentions.  It's part of the Gnu Public License and encouraged.

But, the by-product has yielded a side-effect I call Distro-Sprawl.  As such, it has become increasingly difficult for users to come to a quick answer as to which Distro they should use.

Despite, Bodhi Linux points to another important issue:  Ongoing Support.

When researching which Distro to use, make not just looking at the feature set a consideration.  Look also at the number of people involved in support.  If it's one or two people, that doesn't mean it isn't a good Distro.  Far from it, Bodhi is the exemplar.  But, the longevity of that Distro is put at risk when there are fewer to support it.  And thus, we see here yet another developer finds himself in the throws of life circumstance with not enough 'bandwidth' to devote to his open source development pursuits.  The critical decision is made to pull the plug.  The developer retires.  You are left high and dry.

It doesn't have to be that way if you look at the top 5 Distributions on Distrowatch.  Those are the hardy flowers in the garden.  Those flowers have many gardeners who cultivate and nurture them so as to remain healthy, lush and full.

I encourage developers not to spread themselves 'thin' across vaguely familiar Distros.  Come on board one of the larger Top 5 Distros and put your talent towards something which will be long-lasting and meaningful.  -- Dietrich

Related articles

• Top Ten Sleeper Distros
• Cookie Cutter Distros Don't Cut It

Read More

Linux and The Pitfalls of Tribalism

by Dietrich Schmitz

Wow.  What a title for a story eh?  

Well, sad to say, I've been thinking for a long time about this very topic and regret to report that Linux on the Desktop languishes and suffers at the hands of Tribalism to a large extent.

You see, it's really human nature at its best.  Spawned from the nucleus of base Distros (Distrowatch top 20) comes another 'newborn' clone and immediately a tribe forms around it.  The people in these tribes are assumed to conform to community principles,  sharing and working collaboratively.

The reality is often decidedly different.  In fact, I think it's accurate to say tribalism influences most everything we do.  I'm not just talking about Linux.  That may be a hard pill to swallow, but, Tribalism pervades our lives and society.

That's quite profound when you think about it.  And today, I read an excellent piece which zeroes in on this very subject and calls it what it is, How Tribalism Overrules Reason, and Makes Risky Times More Dangerous.

The author, David Ropeik, writes candidly:

Tribalism is pervasive, and it controls a lot of our behavior, readily overriding reason. Think of the inhuman things we do in the name of tribal unity. Wars are essentially, and often quite specifically, tribalism. Genocides are tribalism - wipe out the other group to keep our group safe – taken to madness. Racism that lets us feel that our tribe is better than theirs, parents who end contact with their own children when they dare marry someone of a different faith or color, denial of evolution or climate change or other basic scientific truths when they challenge tribal beliefs. What stunning evidence of the power of tribalism! (By the way, it wasn’t just geocentrist Catholics in the 16 adn 1700s who denied  evidence that the earth travels around the sun. Some Christian biblical literalists still do. So do a handful of ultra orthodox Jews and Muslims.) (...)

Yet another example is the polarized way we argue about so many issues, and the incredible irony that as we make these arguments we claim to be intelligent (smart, therefore right) yet we ignorantly close our minds to views that conflict with ours. Dan Kahan, principal researcher into the phenomenon of Cultural Cognition, has found that our views are powerfully shaped so they agree with beliefs of the groups with which we most strongly identify. His research, along with the work of others, has also found that the more challenged our views are, the more we defend them…the more dogmatic and closed-minded we become...an intellectual form of ‘circle-the-wagons, we’re under attack’ tribal unity. Talk about tribalism overruling reason

Paging the Linux Project/Community managers of the world, I reach out to them in sympathy and know how challenging their jobs can be:

Appeal to people's sensibilities: Exercise reasoned logic in setting forth your project's objectives.  Seek opinions and involvement at all levels and garner input from all participants.  Everyone's opinion is important, whatever it may be.

At times, conceptual differences may be unavoidable.  Major design changes often are a source of friction and outright opposition.  Things like systemd come to mind.  Avoid the 'us vs. them' mindset. 

There is no shortage of contentious debate centered around systemd coming from those 'Tribes' which may or may not offer sound reasons for not following in the path of the majority of Distributions to incorporate systemd.  Is your Team seeing things clearly?  Or is thinking clouded by other factors which may not have anything to do with the subject matter?  Examine what you do in these situations to avoid the pitfalls of Tribalism.

So, the next time you find yourself involved in a forum/relay chat group discussion, step back.  Take stock of the situation and have a good look at the dynamics and what is happening.  Hopefully, by making your own conscious effort in self-appraisal, you will stay within the bounds of courteous discourse and avoid thinking patterns that result in conflict and obstructions to advancing group goals.

Most importantly, be a thinker, an individualist, not a Tribalist.  Yet strive to cooperate and bridge differences.


-- Dietrich

Related articles

• Cookie Cutter Distros Don't Cut It
• Red Hat Enterprise Linux: LSB Certification Means Stability, Lower Cost
• How Tribalism Overrules Reason, and Makes Risky Times More Dangerous

Read More

Get in the Game. Fedora is Linux Done Right

by Dietrich Schmitz

Join Fedora's growing community backed by a multi-billion dollar sales commercial Distribution, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL).

Consolidated development on one Distribution with continual refinement and focus. Don't waste time with non-standard cookie cutter, me too Distros which, most likely, won't be here in five years.

The next Fedora Desktop Linux is taking shape, continually evolving.  Being the first to include new advanced technologies like systemd, Fedora leads the way to the future of Linux.

That's right.  Fedora is a 'test bed' for future RHEL feature enhancements. Most importantly, work done on Fedora is 100% Linux Standard Base (LSB) ISO compliant.

How important is Linux Standard Base?

One need only look to the pure number of Distros that exist today for examples of variation to understand the problems inherent in added complexity introduced by ignoring standards like LSB.

So, download Fedora today.

And, Get in the Game. Fedora is Linux Done Right.

-- Dietrich

Related articles

• The Fedora Project is the Best FOSS Community-Driven Linux Distribution
• Don't Compromise. Go with the Best of Breed: Fedora 19
• Sandbox? What Sandbox? -- Fedora Has You Covered

Read More

On Good Design, Standards, and Divisiveness

by Dietrich Schmitz

I am shaking my head and letting out a chuckle.  Because today, I read how Ubuntu, or, Canonical Ltd., in their own infinite wisdom have decided to reinstate 'Menus' in select applications, including Nautilus.

Good grief.  So, throwing the baby out with the bath water wasn't a good idea after all?

I should say not.

I've been dead set against Unity from the beginning and have taken the position that it represents in its great desire to be 'different' a net software regression.

Removing menus was a mistake and flies in the face of common sense and good sound design principles.

That with a host of other changes which have essentially given Canonical Ltd firm control of their software development, including Mir, have placed them in total isolation from the community at large and distinguish Ubuntu as the only Distro that uses the novel Unity graphical user interface.

Arguably, they have made some technology advancements, but to many, they have created a rift and wholesale development shift in avoidance of Unity and its attendant technical issues entirely.

Wayland fortunately continues to progress and paves the way for Distros which plan to migrate away from the aged and complicated X.org Display driver semantics.  This is a bridge that will be crossed soon and Mir will be the singular X.org replacement going forward for Ubuntu, unless they reverese their position and current thinking.  It would really be in their best interests to support Wayland so as to be uniform with all upstream development but then Canonical Ltd., would yield control away from sole ownership of Mir and have to 'cow-tow' to the community or at least make an attempt to 'cooperate' and contribute to Wayland.

But, that is the way it is.  Live by the sword, die by the sword.  Canonical Ltd. has made their own strategic business decisions and must live with them.  It's not too late for them to come to their senses and drop Mir and support Wayland.  It would be a good move.

+Mark Shuttleworth you've done the right thing by standardizing on systemd.  Don't be divisive.  Adopt Wayland and dump the Mir project.  Do the right thing.

-- Dietrich

Related articles

• Ubuntu desktop moving application menus back into application windows
• Moving Sideways
• Ubuntu's ditching Unity's global menu, returning to in-app menus

Read More

Ignore Linux Standards at Your Own Peril

by Dietrich Schmitz

So, I've been watching the progression of all things Linux for the past few months and noting how many Distributions are falling in line with systemd adoption and those which are not.

Systemd adoption by major Linux Distributions

The freedom to make choices in software design which introduce variation ultimately exacts a cost.  It's not apparent up front but in the long term, introducing 'variation' of any kind into a operating system results in additional complexity.  Only recently has holdout Debian gotten around to recognizing that their sysvinit system is beginning to show its age and 'limitations'.  Uniformity lends to conformity and implied standardization, sometimes in the form of 'de facto' standards.

Today, I am reminding readers of the importance of adhering to standards as the image below shows how being Linux Standard Base compliant can and will lead to lower cost of operation and ongoing maintenance.

Linux Foundation promulgated 'Linux Standard Base'

Does having to adhere to standards stifle creativity and freedom of choice?  

Well, there's room for debate on that question and while to a degree standards compliance does impose a restriction on the respective developer's freedom to deviate, it also results in reducing complexity and to a larger extent fosters an environment in which software vendors and business concerns can reliably make assumptions which utilize those standards, including standard software behaviors, to streamline cost of operation from both consistency and reliability points of view: less complexity, fewer points of failure.  With fewer points of failure, reliability goes up and support costs go down.

Is my preferred Distro 'X' Linux Standard Base compliant?

It's an important question.  Let's take a look at Microsoft Windows for an answer.

Historically, over the past fifteen years preferring to work with Windows has been rightfully perceived by CIOs and CEOs as an implied standard, and despite Microsoft being a Monopoly, every developer knows that they have only one software API to deal with when choosing to code Windows executables on the Windows Legacy x86 platform.  That makes Windows an implied or 'de facto' standard, in lieu of there being any other competitor in a market.  And the choices imposed on Developers are made simple.  There's just one theoretical 'Distro' to think about when it comes to designing a piece of software for a given market.

But, there aren't any 'Distros' in the Windows world.  

Of course, but you see, Distro variation is non-existent, along with the implicit complexity stemming from compiler dialectic variations, differing package management and file hierarchy structure design considerations.  They're all gone and the attendent costs exacted on program development don't pertain in the Windows software development thriving ecosystem.

Should there be fewer Linux Distros?  

I don't argue for fewer Distros.  However, I do maintain that if the designers of Distro X conform to a base standard and not deviate, they will not have compromised their right to creative choice.  One need only look to the richness and diversity of software written to the Windows API to have an answer.

As long as Linux developers continue to clone new Distros and cheerlead the way, all the while ignoring standards, the chance for long-term survival of their work is put at peril.

Big Business Craves Stability

Simply put, Big Business Enterprise cannot afford downtime and thus the reputation of any Enterprise grade software system hinges on its stability and reliability in addition to effectiveness in providing a business solution.

There will not be as many Distros in five years as there are today.  

That fact is a certainty.

By attrition, some Distros will simply fade away into disuse.  The sturdy long-termers will consolidate and survive by adopting common standards and as there will be far fewer Distros, more programming effort will be spread across the few remaining base Linux Distros.  My prediction is there will be no more than six remaining in five years.

But be assured, Linux will continue to endure and survive, flourishing on a base set of LSB-compliant Distributions for many years to come.  -- Dietrich

Related articles

• The Debian Init System Deba{te|cle}
• Fedora - 10 Years
• Sandbox? What Sandbox? -- Fedora Has You Covered

Read More

Notable Ubuntu Derivatives

by Dietrich Schmitz

So, you may or may not know that I am not a fan of Ubuntu. Let's leave the reasons out. It has become tedious and the topic of why is painfully boring at this stage of the game.

But despite what is or isn't happening with Ubuntu, depending on your point of view, much is happening elsewhere and that is fortunately a 'good thing' for the prospective Linux user.

I have spent much time discussing how I feel about the plethora of choices in the Linux ecosystem which is to the point of creating confusion and many inconsistencies across the spectrum.

But that doesn't keep me from seeing value in a narrower segment and if we look at core Distributions close to the base Distros, there is good work being put forth by Developers which in the case of Ubuntu is fostering a thriving Derivative environment.

Those who seek value know that anchoring to the Ubuntu application repository is perhaps their highest criterion for choosing one Distro over another.  On the other hand, those who are avoiding Ubuntu, are likely motivated to find an alternative GUI which let's them feel most comfortable in terms of usability and provides the best balance of functionality.

Let's look at some of what I see as being notable Ubuntu core derivative Distros:

Lubuntu

Now, I list Lubuntu first, not by accident.  It is truly as lean a Distribution as one can get yet still enjoy a good GUI feature set on top of the Ubuntu repo system.  It also happens to be the Distro of my choice.  I stray from it sampling others but keep returning to it.  But my preferences are subjective, since I am using a Netbook.  Yours will likely differ.  If you want a clean and spartan Desktop, which is straight forward and gets out of your way so you can do work, then Lubuntu succeeds.  I've made only minor tweaks turning off the power saver deamon and update notifier and arrive at the Desktop after login with about 130mb ram footprint.  And by virtue of the fact that LXDE in this implementation is using OpenBox as its window (stacking) manager, it is perhaps the fastest Desktop.  (CrunchBangers hold your fire -- this is strictly Ubuntu Derivatives being discussed).

Bodhi Linux

This is perhaps one of the most minimal (ram usage) yet nicest in terms of compositing Distros that I've come across.  Bodhi Linux uses Enlightenment E17 as its GUI.  I am amazed at how much breadth and depth there is to its configurability, yet it weighs in at a mere 70 MB ram footprint.  If you are in love with E17, then this Distro is for you.  This is a capable, nimble derivative, offers much eye candy, yet keeps you in the Ubuntu repo.

Xubuntu

If it weren't for Lubuntu with the OpenBox window manager, I think I'd be using Xubuntu.  Really, the polish of Xfce is a cut above LXDE, and yet, isn't greedy in ram use.  It has its own compositor, the system is spritely and will satisfy by getting the job done with little fanfare.  It and LXDE 'side-step' the XMir/Mir kerfuffle, both using Gtk2/3 and so give that Gnome 'feel' yet are less demanding of the cpu.  As Wayland approaches a stable plateau, expect to see both Lubuntu and Xubuntu transition from X.org to Wayland.  For now, X.org continues to be supported, which is 'peace of mind' for many.

Kubuntu

Many Windows users will find Kubuntu's similarities most to their liking.  Kubuntu uses KDE, of course, and is considered 'Top Dog' to which others Desktop GUIs are compared.  The KDE team fully intend to support X.org going forward and will offer an on-ramp to Wayland in future releases.  You can expect that your 'Apple cart won't be upset' using the strategy of employing a KDE-based Distro.  And, given that Kubuntu is an Ubuntu derivative with commercial support, places you strategically 'in the game' and makes it a safe bet.  The plethora of feature options boggles the mind, but most users will be satisfied with how Kubuntu works out of the box.  While demands placed on ram requirements is a bit higher, one can easily trim away some of the fancier features such as compositing with one setting change to reclaim ram and some additional speed on older PCs or Netbooks.  Kubuntu's aesthetics please and reliability gets the job done -- overall, a nice implementation.

Netrunner-OS

In July 2013, I wrote that Netrunner-OS offers the best out of the box KDE experience of all Linux Distributions.  The Distro coincidentally is produced by Blue Systems whose team is also directly responsible for doing key development for KDE.  Blue Systems contributes also to Kubuntu and Linux Mint KDE edition.

Peppermint OS

Just this weekend, I was spurred by a story about Peppermint OS that wrote how this Distro was a Lubuntu derivative.  It turns out, that is not exactly true -- while it does use LXDE components, it uses the Xfwm4 window manager and many of its supporting components.  So while it sports an lxpanel, I would qualify this as weighted to the Xfce side of things.  Still, I found the implementation to be spritely, clean, professional in its presentation and as good as Xubuntu in terms of overall characteristics and performance.  This is somewhat hybrid but it works well.  Kudos to the Peppermint OS team for a good job and offering real value.

Conclusions

When thinking about notable Ubuntu derivatives, I considered whether or not to include Mint.  I think to include Mint would be wrong.

Mint is in its own league and, as such, given top ranking at Distrowatch (#1), and not what I would qualify as an Ubuntu derivative.

To some extent, it can be argued that their package management system is different, including service packs.  I haven't really heard complaints about Mint.  Most everybody likes it.  But that's why I chose not to list it.  They are a cut above Ubuntu.  So really, that's a hat tip to the Mint Developer Team.

Well, there it is -- a few notable Ubuntu derivatives.  It's hard to get me to say nice things about Linux Distros and when I do, you know it's sincere.  These are good alternatives for you to try.

-- Dietrich

Read More

The Unwitting Linux Saboteurs

by Dietrich Schmitz

I spend time in my Google Plus private Linux Advocates community sharing ideas and trends with colleagues.

Occasionally, we hit on nuggets of gold and when you least expect it, someone comments and really helps put things into perspective.

Last evening, a dear colleague and friend +Shane Keene was sharing his thoughts about Distro-hopping.  We've jokingly coined the term 'Distroholics' for the uncontrollable tendency to not be satisfied with settling down and using one Distro.

It's easy to understand.  It can turn into a real hobby and is admittedly 'fun' to switch Distros and experiment.  And that's a good thing for those who enjoy doing it.

As for +Shane Keene and myself, and a few others in the LA community, we've reached the point where Distro-hopping has lost its luster.  Shane writes in his post:

"I've long since quit my evil distro hopping ways and settled permanently on Arch as the only one that is exactly what I want it to be, but I have discovered another bad habit of mine: I'm a three-timing, DE/WM slut who is constantly bouncing between Awesome WM, Openbox and KDE. But these days, instead of constantly uninstalling/reinstalling/reconfiguring my environment I just keep all three installed full time and use KDM to manage them."

And, that kicked off a series of comments, which is how we 'chew the fat', so to speak.

But, what I didn't expect was such a insightful exchange from +Aaron Seigo.  Don't misunderstand, Aaron is a regular participant in these exchanges--he's quite 'The Thinker', naturally and we all appreciate when he participates--it's just that I didn't expect his off-topic thought to be relevant, but it actually aligns with a series of posts of mine.  So, really, we are in complete agreement.

It's a good read and here's what he wrote as regards Linux Server and Desktop markets in response to participant +Tim Sparrow's comment - "Maybe if we had only 1 or 2 big names in 2008 around the Vista fiasco time" (emphasis added: mine):

"Looking at the server side, I'm not sure this is true. Despite the wide range of options there, including new comers and deaths in the family, server side Linux took off nicely.
Aside from the demographic differences of the target audiences, there are some striking differences between the two markets: 

* there is a general emphasis on stable transition among server side tools
* there is far less 'fork cause i feel like it' behaviour
* there are far fewer significant differences between using distro X for a web server (e.g.)and distro Y than there is between even the same distros on the desktop

I don't think it is the number of distributions; in theory, more distribution channels should mean more opportunities for marketing and a variety of vertically attuned support offerings. 

I think it comes down to the lack of continuity and an emphasis on infighting rather than gathering market. 

This is a deeply embedded cultural norm in Free software on the desktop. GNOME's early days were soaked in this thinking and it just never really stopped. Now we have a further splintering of the desktops with dangerously little thought to the strategic implications and large %s of the Free software desktop using population putting their support behind things that are new despite having untenable futures and being technically deficient relative to the more mature offerings. 

Desktop Linux's own worst enemy has been the desktop Linux community. 

With one or two environments and a focus on application development (a critical matter) rather than getting all excited about which panel looks better on the left side of the screen (which does not gain more market share, people), even with 10x the number of distributions, we would be much further along. Much further. 

Instead, we engaged in a years long battle of mutual tearing down for no benefit, and it continues today. 

With regret, I consider the various new desktop environments, those who enthusiastically support them and all the distributions and environments drifting towards distro/environment specific applications to be unintentional traitors to the goal of spreading Free software on the desktop. 

Short sighted behaviour is sabotaging things, not the number of distros."

Thank you to all the commentators and especially Aaron.  I hope the readership will reflect long and hard on the above.

-- Dietrich

Related articles

• Linux Distros: Too Many of 'Em?
• Linux Desktop: Little Innovation, Lots of Mediocrity
• Don't Compromise. Go with the Best of Breed: Fedora 19
• The Linux Community: No Rational Discourse Allowed?
• Your Career: Large Linux Project Involvement Key

Read More

Thank You Cloverleaf for the Referrals, If Nothing Else.

by Dietrich Schmitz

I have to laugh.  In reviewing referral sources for the month of June, Cloverleaf-linux.org is quite active.

Thank you so much Cloverleaf Team!

If nothing else, my story, to which you so generously linked, does have merit. (Image credit: bubblews.com)

And, I think those who assess the level of mean-spirited behavior your clan displayed in the comment section confirms what I wrote.

Much of what goes on in many camps, like yours, is ego-driven, opportunistic, and shows little talent.  It is, yet, another cookie cutter Distro in the ever-growing Distrowatch sprawl.

My prediction is that you'll have one year of busy bee work and then everyone will grow tired and then say, "I don't want to play anymore.", and then that will be the end of it.

I give credit to only a few community Distro teams for having the intellectual capacity to drive and move Linux forward.  Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, Mageia, Gentoo and Arch really do the bulk of the technology grunt work, while the other rag tag teams ride on their coattails and take every opportunity to pat themselves on the back.

Otherwise, it's pure ego fulfillment and much intellectual masturbation prevails in the Linux ecosystem.

Don't like what I write?  Please.  By all means, put up another back-link to it and thank you very much in advance for the referrals and, of course, we mustn't forget, your usual vitriol.

Cheers!

--Dietrich

Related articles

• Debian 7: A So-So Distro Not Worth Switching For
• Your Career: Large Linux Project Involvement Key
• Linux Desktop: Little Innovation, Lots of Mediocrity
• Emmabuntus: Yet More Recycled Bits?
• The Fedora Project is the Best FOSS Community-Driven Linux Distribution

Read More

Your Career: Large Linux Project Involvement Key

by Dietrich Schmitz

When everyone pulls their own oar and to a beat the vessel moves along quite well does it not?

Every organization operates much like this on a certain level.

Without a cadence, timing, planning, and execution, the vessel won't move forward -- at least not efficiently.

It might even sit still and possibly move backwards.

When conflicting goals and interests arise, those oars no longer operate in unison.

What would it be like if suddenly, the majority of developers chose not to write for their respective Distribution and all came aboard one large vessel equipped with many oars?

Might then the ability to reach goals and objectives increase and be obtained more quickly?  Might the vessel be more powerful and move with greater speed?

How do you see yourself (the Developer) having an effect on the outcomes of Linux 'at large' in terms of achieving success?  What is your measure of success?

Would working on a single larger project be more meaningful if you knew the potential for your work's positive effect would be realized?

These are things which I have thought about as I survey the current Distribution sprawl.  So many are bound to recede into insignificance and I predict only a few, larger ones, will remain standing in five years.  I submit, as few as six Distros will still be around.  The rest of you, former hackers, wasting time on an obscure Distribution, will have grown jaded, tired and moved on leaving dead projects behind.  Those Distros will whither, dry up and simply die.  If this is true, then wouldn't making a decision today to redirect your talent to actually doing something which has a chance of being genuinely useful in five years be an important career decision?

I fear for young Developers who have invested their energy in smaller Distros and their projects without thinking about whether they are doing what's best for their own career path.

I've written that I feel there are too many Distros.  Qualitatively, only a few have merit, technology-wise, and the rest, like Cloverleaf, are merely clones with just some minor adaptation.  Sadly, this isn't progress.  It isn't innovating and for the young ambitious Developer, it is a waste of your precious skills, talent and time.  It won't advance your career.  Worse, if a project closes unexpectedly, you'll have potentially wasted many hours or years of your life, for naught.  Don't allow that to happen.  Don't say, "I wasted [x] years of my life."  That would be a shame.

Find a large project.  Move up the food chain and mingle with the Big Fish in the Big Pond and learn from truly experienced technology professionals.  Gain from advanced thinking that thrives in those environments and benefit from accelerated learning.

I don't care which, but move up the scale to the large Distros, Debian, Fedora, Mageia, Ubuntu, and get involved.  Get your foot in the door there however you can and stay there where one can truly make a difference and grow intellectually at the same time.

Don't Become a Big Fish in a Little Pond.  It won't help your career.

-- Dietrich

Related articles

• Red Hat Enterprise Linux: LSB Certification Means Stability, Lower Cost
• Fedora 19 Schrodinger's Cat Feature Review
• The Insidious Nature of Chromebooks
• Linux Desktop: Little Innovation, Lots of Mediocrity
• Linux Foundation's Linux Training Scholarship Program Opens for Applications

Read More