Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 23:12:52 -0800 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: "Lee Crites (AEI)" <leec@adam.adonai.net> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Wishlists (was Re: SCO (was Re: hi terry)) Message-ID: <21153.890377972@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 19 Mar 1998 23:06:06 CST." <Pine.BSF.3.95.980319225323.20765F-100000@adam.adonai.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I guess I have to apologize, then. I was under the impression > that things were a little more organized/structured. I thought > there was some core team who periodically met/communicated on > what was what and where things should go, and how we should get > there. Nope, not really. I occasionally rant at people about things I think *really* need doing (the [in]famous story of my bounce buffer rant still being told to this day :) but anything people actually do about it is still voluntary, however much I or anyone else might jump up and down. > So I am now curious about how FreeBSD maintains it's cohesiveness > and direction. If people are working on things which annoy them, > then how are new features implemented? Who decides what to add People often get annoyed by the lack of new features. :) > and how to add it? Is it pure anarchy, with each person moving > in the direction they personally feel they should go? Basically, yes. The core team essentially provides the cohesion by deciding which of these new features follows the "spirit" of FreeBSD and make technical sense, David (our principal architect) providing the tie-breaking vote in any close decisions. Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?21153.890377972>