Almost seven months have been past since Kurt Skauen, author of the Athe(na) Operating System released version 0.3.7. As Kurt have already publicly said, some personal outstanding issues, plus because he needed some time off his project, he did not touch the AtheOS codebase since then. However, some third party AtheOS developers lately have been working on producing alternatives or improved versions of some AtheOS parts, namely, replacements for the login screen, desktop etc. We tried to contact Kurt regarding the fate of AtheOS (which seems to be facing possible forks from many fronts), but we received no reply.
AtheOS Fate in Question – But Users Hungry for New Features
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
*forgive me I know eug here frequents the dev list
It’s just kurts on a vacation and no one wants to touch the core, and those whom might are either too busy working on it to putup a site about their fork, or not busy enough working on it for there to be any point announcing it.
AtheOS is too far along and has too much potential for it to die in at least the next few years. But again, alot of potential means it hasnt grown enough yet, its lacking alot but the remainder of what it does have is, to me at least, better then most other OSes so I am hoping it will continue to grow.
It looks like it is time for Kurt to pass the banton on; one should keep a version of AtheOS 0.3.7 around, as it is the original author’s last release. However, it looks like AtheOS is going the same way the GIMP, MUTT, FVWM, and other notable OSS projects are going: The group maintaining the code base is changing.
I think Kurt is best off giving these sub group the blessing to be the official AtheOS maintainers; it takes a big load off of his shoulders.
I know that “letting go” of an OSS project, even when not actively maintaining the code base, is very difficult.
– Sam
AtheOs seems to be a fine example of why having a one-man team or any team without a “chain of command” is a. ..erhm…less than ideal foundation for an OS project. Having an appointed “number 1” to hand over the reins to (no matter if you’re using the GPL) if, and when you get tired is a very good idea.
Live and learn people. A human being needs rest and relaxation, but a project needs momentum. Then again, in the case of Atheos, Kurt was only doing it for fun, I gather.
I think most developer still honour Kurt request to be the developer of kernel and GUI. Since he is now seem busy with other thing I think it is a good idea if he could handed over the right to develop AtheOS to the community and maybe become the maintainer as Linus and other Linux maintainer do.
Looking at the developers site such as http://www.kamidake.org there are quite a lot of code contributor for the application. It is very pity if a good and user friendly OS just died because of slow core development. I think Eugenia also among the code contributor (if it is the same Eugenia).
Although most application are taken from other unix but the concept it have are totally different from unix, window$ or mac world. If I myself is rich, I have no doubt to fund the project as one of Desktop OS alternative.
On one hand I believe Kurt should be in control, after all the users and developers of AtheOS siliently agreed to that when installing it and seeing how the development happened. However Kurt hasn’t been around for various reason for over 6 months now. The code was GPL’d by Kurt for a reason, and I believe this is it. I hate to say it but maybe this is the time to split the code base, this would allow Kurt to develop AtheOS at his pace and with his goals in mind while the other code base is maintained by a user committe of some sort so we can get not only a more useable OS but maybe play around with the different ideas floating around the mailing list lately (and hopefully with some sort of standard in place).
Can you blame them? People just want a usable Operating System.
I don’t think its calling the future of AtheOS into question, though. Different versions of things like the desktop have been floating around for years. Personally, hacking a version of the desktop was one of the first things I did with AtheOS.
As for contacting Kurt, if you used his atheos.cx address, its likely the mail spool is still b0rked. We know Kurt is paying attention to the mailing list again, he changed the Reply-To munging recently, and has sent a few mails to the list in the last week or so.
Now, if someone starts compiling their own base.tgz binaries and making their own distribution, then we can talk about a fork.
title says it all, really
The way the mailing list is going and what types of software is being developed, I don’t think that AtheOS is going anywhere. The majority of the developers, are willing to ride things out and wait for Kurt to provide updates.
There are a few developers that are working on improving the desktop (one of Kurts areas) with full knowledge that Kurt might wipe is all away with the next release. Heck software thatI’m developing right now could be completely incompatible with the next release, but I enjoy the OS and the community so I’m not worried.
(off topic:See Mailing list FAQ)
Or is Eugenia trying to get a new version out next week
The OS was kurt own project for his enjoyment. I think he only made it avalible just so others could see it. He has no responablity to anyone. Why would he ever just toss it to others. That would defeat the whole learing and creative process he had going on with it. I think it is great that he takes breaks from it. It shows he does relize there are other things than computers in the world. If he never wants to work on it again thats fine. I don’t think he should be compeled to hand things over to others cause he doesn’t want to work on it. Would you want people going off with something you did and doing all sorts of stuff to it that may have nothing to do with what you wanted to see? OpenSource projects can die just like a closed one. If the project was mine and I decided not to work on it anymore i would take down the site and the source and go away, maybe leave a message saying please don’t do anything with the source you have i don’t want to see progress go on. I would hate to come back in a year and see what people have done to it. Most likely I would hate what I see. I think i remember he GPL’d it basicly just because and considered changing the license. In the end he has no resoponsablity to anyone, since it was his project and forced no one to use or work on it.
Here’s the deal…I know that Kurt started AtheOS as his own project and out of his own curiosity for a challenge, but my feeling is that if you open source a project, particularly a really good one, you have a responsibility to those who use it to either maintain it or give your blessing to those that fork it.
AtheOS is a nice project, but no matter what Kurt’s intentions are, if he doesn’t continue to development it should be pursued by others. And if Kurt doesn’t take the initiative to appoint someone the “official” maintainer, then AtheOS could run into the same mess that Linux is in – two hundred people writing their own versions and variations.
Just my “too sense.”
Let people breath.
We’re talking lots of people working to a common goal. And a goal I’d FAR rather see than AtheOS. Hey, what can I say? BeOS *RULES* da roost, man!
What 200 versions of Linux do you see? Linux is a kernel. There are a lot of distributions, but that’s not the same thing.
I’m more of a FreeBSD type, I’ve concluded, and part of that does come from the coherency when the kernel and system utilities are all developed together. But the whole “Linux is so fragmented it’s like armed camps” thing is vastly overstated; I’ve used SLS, Slackware, Red Hat, SuSE, Debian, Progeny and Gentoo Linux distributions–not to mention FreeBSD’s Linux emulation, which is in a sense its own distribution–and while there are differences, in practice anything you can do with one you can do with another and more often not in the same way.
As for AtheOS–yes, I’d be happy if people took it over. I don’t think it’s going to fragment and die because of that–I think it’ll die if its entire future is tied up in a creator who can’t sustain his own interest in the project. I’ve watched projects outside the computer field die because of that–I’ve been the creator, in fact. It’s not a pretty thing.
Well, one thing is that there is a GPL version of the code out there, and because of the way GPL works, THAT version of the source can be used and hacked on until Kurt changes the license (as the source IS still his, license or not). One thing I’m not sure of is whether or not he can legally retroactively re-license old versions of the source. I don’t think you can do that under GPL.
To WattsM: I know Linux is a kernel, not an OS. I was being very liberal in my speech because I thought people would understand that “Linux,” in reality, is used by most to describe the entire OS nowadays. There are still hardcores that insist it be called “GNU/Linux,” but c’mon. Ain’t gonna happen.
In the meantime, there are well over 200 distributions of Linux, and without getting off topic, it’s in my opinion, one of the biggest disadvantages. Most Linux zealots don’t realize that the freedom they love about Linux holds it back in other arenas because the variety is too much from system to system.
(bringing it all around) That’s why I’d like to see AtheOS centrally maintained – and well maintained, because if everyone can agree that “THIS IS ATHEOS,” that’s a major point in its favor.
Why not fork it?
Forking can be a very good thing for OSS projects when a one-size-fits-all solution is not the best one…the BSD family of operating systems is an excellent example of this. That is one of the biggest differences between Linux and the BSDs…Linux is a one-size-fits-all OS while each of the BSDs are optimized for a certain thing. MacOS X is optimized for the desktop, FreeBSD is the best for Server and workstation use, OpenBSD is good when security is essential, NetBSD is among the most portable operating systems around…and arguably each of these systems beat Linux in their area of optimization.
So fork Atheos if you need it for something different than Kurt does.
This seems to be the basic cycle here…
1. Kurt releases another version of AtheOS
2. Article in major online ‘zine includes blurb.
3. Source file server is overloaded, causes people to wait hours for a place in line. (Originally, Kurt’s employer provided some bandwidth, but they had to limit it around “release” dates because of the extreme load.)
4. Many new people subscribe to list.
5. First posts from new subscribers point out pieces missing. Or ask about porting libraries used on other systems. “AtheOS would be the greatest if only….” Merits of programs available on BeOS are examined.
6. Humungous debate about merits of porting other software. (I read email *every day*, otherwise I have 100+ NEW messages from this group alone. Takes a while just to scan and delete them.)
7. “I can’t boot.” “Can I use LILO?”
8. The FAQ is posted.
9A. “I want to change some core aspect of AtheOS” posts.
9B. “Kurt does core, anyone else can do applications and drivers.”
9C. BeOS is similar to AtheOS; they are not the same.
10. Time passes….
11. A single “Is AtheOS dead?” post appears (optional).
12. One week later, a new version of AtheOS is announced.
And the cycle repeats itself.
(Hmm… 12 rungs on the Cosmic Wheel…)
actualy, just like with any Licenced object you acuire, the licence that came with it when you acuired it is the licence you are legaly obligated to. if he changed the licence of all new versions, or even all new versions that he let folks DL, the one released under the GPL that you have still maintains the GPL licence and can be used as such.
Just out of curiosity: does anyone planning to fork the code think they are as good a programmer as Kurt?
Did the OpenBeos guys ever look at using the Atheos Kernel instead of NewOS? Not that I dislike NewOS -it’s cool- but I was just wondering.
…looks very nice. Very nice indeed.
A team should fork AtheOS. It has potential. I’m sure Kurt would be happy to have started a successful OS, rather than just done a dead-in-the-end hobby OS.
Actually, the CVS sources showed that some files were modified a month after 0.3.7 was released, so really it’s 6 months and not 7.
Not that it really matters if it’s 6 or 7.
Wait, nevermind. I thought that 0.3.7 was released in September, not November.
Ignore my previous post.
“One thing I’m not sure of is whether or not he can legally retroactively re-license old versions of the source. I don’t think you can do that under GPL.”
I don’t see why the GPL’ed code doesn’t have a life of its own, even if the original author changes the licenses of all following releases of the source code – what’s seen the light of day’s seen the light of day, in effect the author has entered into a contract with all the users of the code up till that point, and he can’t go back on that contract with those people. For new releases yes, he can do whatever he likes.
For a real-life example, drop Moshe Bar a line about OpenMosix and a few hassles he had.
Thank you! I spent a lot of time working on it. I just want to say that right now, I have no intention of forking. I just wanted a better desktop
. Now if Kurt says that he is not going to work on AtheOS any longer or if he doesn’t show up by June, I say we should definately talk about it. We had this talk awhile ago and we decided to wait to see if Kurt came back. I think AtheOS is a great project and I don’t want it to go to waste, so if Kurt is going to abandon the project then I say we should talk about forking it. It is all up to Kurt and I respect him, so if he says that he is going to work on AtheOS, then I say that he will. Until then, there is nothing wrong with working on parts of the system. The might not make it into the main branch, but they also might 
.