From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 9 21:44:38 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09CE616A4CE for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2004 21:44:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from imo-m19.mx.aol.com (imo-m19.mx.aol.com [64.12.137.11]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E6F743D48 for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2004 21:44:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from TM4526@aol.com) Received: from TM4526@aol.com by imo-m19.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v37_r3.8.) id w.1f3.2319f2b (3858); Tue, 9 Nov 2004 16:44:29 -0500 (EST) From: TM4526@aol.com Message-ID: <1f3.2319f2b.2ec2943d@aol.com> Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 16:44:29 EST To: thad.butterworth@hp.com MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5114 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1 cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: difference between releases X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 21:44:38 -0000 In a message dated 11/8/04 4:46:24 PM Eastern Standard Time,=20 thad.butterworth@hp.com writes: >By the way, I=E2=80=99ve tested our competitions printers. HP=E2=80=99s pri= nters are far=20 better >designed than anything else I=E2=80=99ve worked with. The point is p= rogramming=20 and >computer technologies are very young fields. You=E2=80=99re going to fi= nd problems=20 >whether it=E2=80=99s closed or open source. Just don=E2=80=99t get bitter a= bout it. Work=20 instead to >make it better instead of complaining about everything. Like I s= aid=20 previously, let=E2=80=99s >see some helpful suggestions Two words: Paper Paths. Feeding has always been an issue. Your post script sucks wind too. But I digress... The "technologies" are not in question, its the controls and the methods. An= d=20 I'm not sure why you keep harping on open source, because this thread has nothin= g to do with it. BSDi vs FreeBSD is a good example. BSDi had a set of features= =20 and objectives, and when they were "done" (ie fully tested) they released it.=20 Personally I think BSDi took it to extremes by making releases way too comprehensive an= d would have preferred sub-relreases rather than their annoying patch system,=20 but it illustrates the difference between having a meaningful, documented releas= e=20 structure rather than just slapping out a snapshot because its "time". At so= me point you have to stop working on stuff, hammer out a release, and then star= t working again. It shouldn't just be a moment in time of -current, with all=20 the=20 uncertainty that entails. I'm not saying that's how it works, but when this=20 thread started, that's how it was depicted.