From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Apr 18 10:02:07 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA18037 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 18 Apr 1997 10:02:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.50]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA18028 for ; Fri, 18 Apr 1997 10:02:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id JAA02193; Fri, 18 Apr 1997 09:57:06 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199704181657.JAA02193@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: Price of FreeBSD (was On Holy Wars...) To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 09:57:06 -0700 (MST) Cc: dennis@etinc.com, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199704172357.RAA17382@rocky.mt.sri.com> from "Nate Williams" at Apr 17, 97 05:57:54 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Uhh, yeah. You want stability, then you can't have 'brand-new' > features. You can't have it both ways. > > To put it into a scenario you might understand. > > : I want to beta-test your newest product before it's released > : publically, but it better be *rock* solid since I need your latest > : driver to handle the huge network loads I'm using. And, I'll complain > : if it makes my machine unstable. That looks like what he actually wants, as opposed to what he says he thinks he wants. Why can't the latest driver work in a rock solid system, or why can't a rock solid driver work in the latest system? A beta user accepts some risk, but they shouldn't have to risk everything. Rgards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.