Python Risk

[Carlos Ribeiro]

At 20:05 09/05/01 +0400, Roman Suzi wrote:
>On Wed, 9 May 2001, Daniel Klein wrote:
> >I'm now a strong Python advocate but a question that seems to be comming up
> >quite a bit lately is, what would happen to the language if something 
> happened
> >to our BDFL (aka GVR)? Would the language stagnate or is there enough of a
> >'machine' out there to continue its evolution and support?
>
>Python is also LESS risk than closed source solution, because
>you know people who develop it, you can usually write to them
>and receive an answer.

There is also another (stronger) reason for this. What does happen when a 
closed source company goes broke? The products are D-E-A-D. It does not 
matter if a bunch of people depend on the product for their work, and it 
has happened a lot of times. OTOH open source products don't die this way. 
They may die, but a different death - one caused by lack of interest in the 
product.

If the product is useful, it will live. Even if the author dies, anyone may 
take the product and do the maintenance that is needed, either by himself 
or by means of a hired programmer. Of course, there are some assumptions on 
this scenario:

1) the product has a solid and simple architecture, that is easy to 
understand and to maintain;
2) the tools needed to work on the project are well known in the market;
3) you are willing to do the work yourself, or to pay for someone to do it 
for you.

Clauses (1) and (2) are already true in the case of Python. (3) is up to 
whoever have this problem. Unfortunately, *lots* of people are looking only 
at the free-as-in-beer side of the open source equation.


Carlos Ribeiro