[Tell It Right]

An excellent point about open source. Open source can be very practical from a cost perspective. But in the end you don't really know what you're building your software from.

Yet at the same time if you build all of your software in house (which I've been part of multiple times, particularly on the lower tier or middle tier), you absolutely must require documentation of the work and code review so that the system can be maintained even after one or two key people leave.

[GingisK]

I read somewhere that if your software uses freeware, it can be argued that yours becomes open.

[MulberryDraw]

Who wants to do the documentation, code review and testing for free? Even a lot of paid engineers would rather not do these steps.

[Myrddin]

One of my misgivings with Java is use of libraries stashed in repos. It makes your own software into a "stew" of software of varying quality. It is also bloated in terms of disk space required. Around 2005, I worked on a project that was entirely in C++. The full source was around 200 kilobytes. The customer wanted a "moving map" display added. They wanted a specific map already available in Java. I was working remotely with a 22 kilobytes/second symmetric ISDN based digital line. My usual morning routine consisted of connecting to the repo server and updating my source. In came the Java. 55 MEGABYTES of Java on top of 200 kilobytes of C++. Ouch. Especially with 22Kbps service. It is of less concern today of 1 Gbps symmetric fiber and local disk space of 2 TB.