On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:55 AM, Louigi Verona <louigi.verona(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote: i don't think that it is accurate anymore to think of the development process for the linux kernel as "hobbyist". it is probably a better description of the application space, but even there, it doesn't apply across the board. people who don't develop software (and even some who do) sometimes imagine that the process inside a company than actually pays its developers is radically different from the one that involves hobbyists. the differences are not as dramatic as you might think, and in the case of particularly small companies, there can effectively be no difference at all.

On Wed, 6 Feb 2013 06:44:23 -0500 Paul Davis <paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote: tl;dr: "Hobbyist" and "Professional" are not categories to describe software and other projects. Don't use these words. Whenever I read "hobby" or "hobbyist" I read in the subtext a supposed lack of quality. That is nonsense. The only difference between hobby and profession is, and should be, that one is not paid and the other is. I think it is an error in judgement if you assume that people are most skillful in the thing they do for a living. While for the development of software (or any other art or craft) it is necessary to spend enough time and have enough knowledge and skill. Vice Versa I don't accept "but it is developed in their free time" as an excuse for poor quality. Say what it is, you don't dedicate enough time into developing or lack the expertise or motivation or whatever. Getting paid in a company make some things easier, because the money forces people in teams to have more manpower and maybe you get a good and quiet enviroment to conentrate and other things. But this is maybe balanced out by the "hobbyist" higher motivational level etc. etc. etc. So in the end I think the labels are misleading. Judge software and a project by their overall quality (this includes documentation etc.) and their license, not by the way it is developed. Nils