Live data from Hacker News

The Cathedral, the Bazaar, and the Winchester Mystery House

dbreunig.com

31–40 of 79 posts

Re: The Cathedral, the Bazaar, and the Winchester Mystery House

#31
post #7

The "cathedral" in ESR's essay wasn't proprietary closed source, it was the GNU project.

Not really. From the essay: “I had been preaching the Unix gospel of small tools, rapid prototyping and evolutionary programming for years. But I also believed there was a certain critical complexity above which a more centralized, a priori approach was required. I believed that the most important software (operating systems and really large tools like the Emacs programming editor) needed to be built like cathedrals, carefully crafted by individual wizards or small bands of mages working in splendid isolation, with no beta to be released before its time.”

So the Unix-philosophy small tools that constitute an important part of the GNU project are excluded. Rather, it’s about any programs of significant complexity, like Emacs (and likely GCC) and many commercial products. While the cathedral model doesn’t imply closed source, it implies building “in […] isolation”, rather than in the open. It may or may not remain proprietary and/or closed source.

Linux demonstrated to ESR that complex projects can also be built in the open with many collaborators, and don’t necessarily require the cathedral; which inspired the essay.

Re: The Cathedral, the Bazaar, and the Winchester Mystery House

#32
post #26

So, I’ve explored AI coding, but my conclusion up to this point has been that it’s interesting, but the code is sometimes a mess, and sometimes it will completely crater the project to the point where you just have to throw it all away and start over. After reading this article, I keep wondering if we’re really being productive or just creating lots of crappy code at machine speeds now. It’s one thing to say that we…

Software developers working on their own have built monstrosities before (not as quickly) but it seems likely that this is a skill issue and we will learn how to use these tools better. You can tell coding agents to work on cleaning up code, improving the architecture, and so on. Maybe adopting some hard constraints on code complexity that agents have to work within would help?

Yep, surely humans write bad code, too. But not nearly as fast. This feels a lot like hiring oodles of hyper-productive junior developers. Are we going to get true productivity out of that or a scrambled mess? I don’t know the answer to that. Or maybe the models get so much better that it’s like hiring oodles of senior developers and architects and the payoff is real.

Re: The Cathedral, the Bazaar, and the Winchester Mystery House

#33
post #31
post #7

The "cathedral" in ESR's essay wasn't proprietary closed source, it was the GNU project.

Not really. From the essay: “I had been preaching the Unix gospel of small tools, rapid prototyping and evolutionary programming for years. But I also believed there was a certain critical complexity above which a more centralized, a priori approach was required. I believed that the most important software (operating systems and really large tools like the Emacs programming editor) needed to be built like cathedrals,…

Originally "the GNU project" was supposed to be an operating system. That might be what the parent post was referencing.

Re: The Cathedral, the Bazaar, and the Winchester Mystery House

#34
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. From the essay: “I had been preaching the Unix gospel of small tools, rapid prototyping and evolutionary programming for years. But I also believed there was a certain critical complexity above which a more centralized, a priori approach was required. I believed that the most important software (operating systems and really large tools like the Emacs programming editor) needed to be built like cathedrals,…

Originally "the GNU project" was supposed to be an operating system. That might be what the parent post was referencing.

Maybe, but it’s in any case wrong to say that the cathedral model didn’t also refer to closed-source proprietary software.

Re: The Cathedral, the Bazaar, and the Winchester Mystery House

#35
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasnt one thing, gnu is a case of cathedrals. Corps are usually more cathedrally than bazaary because of their hierarchical top down structure, but ymmv, an elon musk or steve jobs company will be more cathedral than a conglomerate like unilever or a google or microsoft

Google is famously a slime mold.

I will not sit here idly as you disparage an entire kingdom of diverse, beautiful, highly efficient, decentralized problem-solvers. Some of my best friends are slime molds.

Slime Mold Identification & Appreciation (amazing photography)

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1510123272580859

Re: The Cathedral, the Bazaar, and the Winchester Mystery House

#36
post #31
post #7

The "cathedral" in ESR's essay wasn't proprietary closed source, it was the GNU project.

Not really. From the essay: “I had been preaching the Unix gospel of small tools, rapid prototyping and evolutionary programming for years. But I also believed there was a certain critical complexity above which a more centralized, a priori approach was required. I believed that the most important software (operating systems and really large tools like the Emacs programming editor) needed to be built like cathedrals,…

The bottom line is that a lot of software types assume the cathedral vs. bazaar refers to closed source vs. open source and they’re simply wrong.

Re: The Cathedral, the Bazaar, and the Winchester Mystery House

#38
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Software developers working on their own have built monstrosities before (not as quickly) but it seems likely that this is a skill issue and we will learn how to use these tools better. You can tell coding agents to work on cleaning up code, improving the architecture, and so on. Maybe adopting some hard constraints on code complexity that agents have to work within would help?

Yep, surely humans write bad code, too. But not nearly as fast. This feels a lot like hiring oodles of hyper-productive junior developers. Are we going to get true productivity out of that or a scrambled mess? I don’t know the answer to that. Or maybe the models get so much better that it’s like hiring oodles of senior developers and architects and the payoff is real.

Humans just don't commit the same kinds of booboos as LLMs do. My team at work recently started using LLM agents for coding and I have since seen WTFs that I know no human would ever write.

It's not all bad! It's also enormously fun. I've been able to work on things I'd been putting off forever. When I can use LLM agents, I less often feel paralyzed by perfectionism, which is probably the biggest productivity boost I get. My own code has not decreased in quality, and I think that for the truly important things, neither has that of my colleagues.

But LLMs don't make junior dev mistakes. They make "my brain has worms in it" mistakes.

Re: The Cathedral, the Bazaar, and the Winchester Mystery House

#39
post #20

Too bad Winchester didn't become an architect. Julia Morgan, Winchester's contemporary, was the first woman to obtain an architecture license in California in 1904 and had a very prolific career throughout the state including her most famous - Hearst Castle - commissioned in 1919.

One of my guilty pleasures as a software engineer is that working on my Winchester House is way more fun than working on someone else's Cathedral, or Bazaar.

Re: The Cathedral, the Bazaar, and the Winchester Mystery House

#40
post #25

Does anyone have numbers for churn vs. cumulative code? Most of my commits (hand written and AI) have delete counts that are 75-110% the added line count. The point that many developers will probably forget to tell the LLM to run cleanup/refactoring paths is probably true though. (I’ve definitely found ghost-chasing bugfixes in all sorts of corners of LLM generated code).

Yeah /simplify is your friend. That and constrained prompts - “refactor x for simplicity - resulting diff must remove n lines of code. Dont change tests. “
Post reply on HN