User talk:Uris/Raul-Kate

Raul's Take on My Comment about Kate's Tools
You recently made this comment on Kate's page. Since the comment shows you are unaware of the situation, allow me to inform you. Kate's tools are written in Java. There are currently two implimentations of the Java virtual machine we could concievably use - the one from Sun that is proprietary, or an Open Source one. The open source one is "1000 times slower" than Sun's (according to Jimbo when I met him last) and for now, is unusable. Sun's distribution is proprietary, and for philisophical reasons, we do not use it on the servers. Currently, the developers are working very hard to make Kate's tool work with the open source implimentation and they already have a working prototype. Furthermore, Kate has not been driven away - she's is still actively developing. So please, next time, before making a comment like that, check your facts first. &rarr;Raul654 03:15, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)


 * "The open source one is '1000 times slower'"
 * "Sun's distribution is proprietary, and for philisophical reasons, we do not use it on the servers."

I appreciate your taking the time to fill in the specifics of the situation with Kate. Limiting this project to open source software limits the functionality and performance of Wikimedia, as you have confirmed. I just wish that Wikipedia was not an overly philosophical body as you have described but rather more platform-neutral and philosophy-neutral. That was my only point. I'm new here though, and my ideas may be strange... but limiting performance on the basis of philosophical reasons would be a bad business decision. Wikipedia, of course, is not for profit and has no competition so it need not be as worried with efficiency. Uris 03:33, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is, first and foremost, a copyleft project. Our *primary* goal is to make what provide - the mediawiki software, and the project databases - usable by all. This means avoiding proprietary licenses. Now, the fact that the open source JVM is 1,000 slower for what *we* want it to do (and not necessarily slower any other applications) would seem to indicate that it is a bug, rather than an inferior implimentation. This is, for the record, something Jimbo was going to get in touch with them about and ask them about to see if they could fix it. &rarr;Raul654 03:57, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)


 * "Our *primary* goal is to make what provide - the mediawiki software, and the project databases - usable by all."

OK... this makes sense that you can't expect everyone down the line to have the same paid software you have. My own style would be to worry primarily about Wikipedia.org, especially now that it is a Top 100 site, and not so much about the people copying the content whose combined traffic will never be equal to that of Wikipedia.org. But, I didn't come up with this great idea! And I do believe it is a tremendous concept. Uris 04:05, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

&rarr;Response by Kate