Reading07

    The Cathedral and the Bazaar explain that the cathedral model is more selective and controlled in that there are very few people working within the closed environment. This is unlike the bazaar model where everything is out and openness is encouraged. It is a war between small groups and autonomy vs large connected and collaborative groups. Although they are different, each model is used to create valuable software experiences for its users and or the developers themselves. 

    "Every good work of software starts by scratching a developer's personal itch." While I don't like to use absolutes, I agree that many successful projects begin with a developer thinking, "It would be cool if…" or "I wonder if…". We have discussed it before, but our passions and curiosities keep us up at night, not how to solve a np-hard problem (unless that is your thing). The reason you come up with ideas for new software is to make something better or create something new for a purpose that you decide, a developer’s itch in my opinion.

    I also agree with the sixth principle: “Treating your users as co-developers is your least-hassle route to rapid code improvement and effective debugging”. In my experience, even when debugging, it is helpful to have more than one person look at your code because having multiple people review your code brings essential perspectives that a single developer might miss. While reading, I wondered if there is such a thing as too many cooks in the kitchen when it comes to various open-source projects. I want to say there is no such thing because of the vastness. Especially for large-scale projects, where there are always updates and new ideas that people can bring to the table. I think it is safe to say that the bazaar style thrives on lots of diverse input, so I would find it difficult to imagine setting a limit on contributors solely because “too many people are involved”.

    In my opinion, to say that you don't treat your users as co-developers is like creating software that you never tested, it never works out. Your users will probably find the bugs before you do and may even have a solution. As the developer, you may assume things will work the way they were intended, but users provide real-world insights that reveal flaws or inefficiencies that were not anticipated. In this way, treating users as co-developers is not just a helpful strategy—it’s essential to building reliable and adaptable software.

    I would not categorize the cathedral model and bazaar model as mutually exclusive. In the beginning, I referred to the cathedral model as being more small group-led/autonomous, meaning it can do things by itself. The opposite would have to mean that there is some sort of dependency, but I do not believe that the bazaar model is dependent on the users/ co-developers. The bazaar allows and promotes collaboration, but that does not mean it is dependent on it. There is autonomy within the bazaar, it is just that the final product consists of various autonomous and collaborative parts. Because of this, I feel as though the bazaar model will become the future of software development. You can rapidly change aspects of the software, expand on different aspects, etc. I feel like trends are rapidly as of lately changing, so it would not be fun or profitable to work long hours to get something to the public that is not catered to the public. When you allow for collaboration, especially from users, you are indirectly ensuring positive success for the software. Ultimately, by blending autonomy with collaboration, the bazaar model not only adapts to changing trends but also caters to the user.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Reading 01

     When I think of a hacker, I think of someone, of course with their hood up in a dark room breaking into something, but I also think of someone extremely intelligent and innovative in their work. For example, Henry Ford said, “If I would have asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses”. If it were me, initially I would have been trying to get the poor horses on steroids in hopes that they would become faster, but Henry Ford created a car.  A hacker to me is someone who can positively and or negatively innovate to impact someone else.       After reading, my perception changed of what a hacker was it became more negative. Initially, I felt as though the MIT hackers were selfish. The book depicted their sole purpose to find out information for themselves and satisfy their curiosity’s hunger. There was no mention of helping people outside of their group. It gave the impression that even if you were in the group you were in ...
Read more

Reading02

To remind myself, the hacker ethic is: Access to computers—and anything which might teach you something about the way the world works—should be unlimited and total. Always yield to the Hands-On Imperative, all information should be free, Mistrust authority—promote decentralization hackers should be judged by their hacking, not criteria such as degrees, age, race, sex, or position,You can create art and beauty on a computer, and Computers can change your life for the better. (from Prof. Bui's slides, thank you!) While reading I was thinking about the idea of intention vs reality. On paper, ideas and solutions sound great, but do they transfer over when put into practice? There was a distinct difference between the hardware hackers from California and the True hackers from MIT: a willingness to share information with everyone, not just those within their circle. I agree with the group and their mission to help the community and dissipate the aura of elitism. I feel as though people s...
Read more

Reading05

     This is way above my pay grade, so please take everything I say lightly. I was surprised to hear how big an impact LISP made on what many would consider today’s ‘need to know’ languages like Python and Java. After reading these essays, the first thing that came to mind was power vs popularity. LISP was created in the late 50s, yet according to the reading, LISP shares many of the main features of Python and Java with additional exclusive features. LISP had the power, yet Python and Java are more popular at least to the average person. Why don’t we just go back and use LISP, if everything is a child of LISP? Python and Java are also fairly new, so why are they used? In the last group of essays, something that I never realized was how impactful American culture has been on computing. Because programming is an American-bred and raised thing, I think it is natural for people to look at the newest thing, but how long will that last? It seems like every language is just a ...
Read more