Interview with Googles Greg Stein and Chris DiBona 17
rchapman writes "After the announcement of the new Google Code service at OSCON 2006 in Portland Oregon, we had the distinct pleasure of sitting down and talking with Google's Open Source Program Manager, Chris DiBona and their Lead Open Source Engineer, Greg Stein in a little more detail. Read the full interview here."
what (Score:2, Funny)
Suggestion for New Poll (Score:2)
Quick Summary (Score:3, Insightful)
A: Oh yes. We definitely want to do that, as with FreshMeat. That's pretty far off though...
Q: So do you think you'll see many converts from sites like SourceForge and FreshMeat to Google Code?
A: Yeah, there will probably be a couple. Also, we don't offer the kind of services that SourceForge does. We're doing something both less and different.
Q:
They don't seem to be doing anything innovative or even exciting. They're just using the power & name of google to create another tool.
Re:Quick Summary (Score:1)
not everyone in google can have or be in charge of the neat, innovative stuff. gruntwork still exists.
How can a person be a Google? (Score:2, Funny)
Or are "Googles" something like "Fraggles"? Because I've forgotten what Fraggle Rock was all about.
What's that you say? Someone just forgot an apostrophe? Oh. Never mind then. Back to business.-
Re:How can a person be a Google? (Score:2)
Re:How can a person be a Google? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:How can a person be a Google? (Score:2)
Another Greg Stein interview... (Score:3, Informative)
Google still violates GPL clause 1 (Score:3, Informative)
1) The physical documentation provided with the GSA does not provide a copy of the GPL.
2) The latest version of the GSA documentation available from the support website [google.com] does not provide a copy of the GPL.
3) The web pages provided from the GSA itself also does not provide a copy of the GPL.
While Google will admit that the GSA does contain GPL covered works and they also claim to be a OSS friendly company, they can not be bothered to follow the very first clause given in one of the most common Linux related licenses.
The bottom line is that Google violates the GPL. Should we really be putting them in a position of trust by accepting "Google Code" from such a company. The fact that Greg Stein and Chris DiBona are willing to answer a couple questions by MadPenguin to spin doctor their company as being "good" does not change that bottom line. Rather, it just makes them two face where they talk about what they want to do for open source out of one mouth and blow off the GPL with the other.
Low Value of a Google Interview (Score:1)