Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 15:29:51 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams), dennis@etinc.com, jkh@time.cdrom.com, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Price of FreeBSD (was On Holy Wars...) Message-ID: <199704182129.PAA24797@rocky.mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <199704182117.OAA02823@phaeton.artisoft.com> References: <199704181522.JAA21382@rocky.mt.sri.com> <199704182117.OAA02823@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The commercial organizations I've dealt with (and in) must schedule > for "minimal feature set", "expected feature set", and then "stretch > goals" over and above that. Then the organizations you dealt with are *very* different than the organizations I've dealt with. I've found that the FreeBSD 'release engineering/software engineering' cycle is orders of magnitudes better than REAL (tm) companies I've worked for and with. > If they told you it was supposed to be fixed in the next product, and > then it wasn't, you'd scream blue murder. Happens more often than not in my experience. The behavior of the bug has changed, but the bug still exists. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704182129.PAA24797>