From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Nov 17 11:37:25 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 749D137B401 for ; Sun, 17 Nov 2002 11:37:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from proxy.centtech.com (moat.centtech.com [207.200.51.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2692143E4A for ; Sun, 17 Nov 2002 11:37:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from sprint.centtech.com (sprint.centtech.com [10.177.173.31]) by proxy.centtech.com (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gAHJbAc27202; Sun, 17 Nov 2002 13:37:10 -0600 (CST) Received: (from root@localhost) by sprint.centtech.com (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) id gAHJbAb05839; Sun, 17 Nov 2002 13:37:10 -0600 (CST) Received: from centtech.com (andersonpc [192.168.42.18]) by sprint.centtech.com (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gAHJb6X05832; Sun, 17 Nov 2002 13:37:07 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <3DD7F107.DCE620A6@centtech.com> Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 13:41:59 -0600 From: Eric Anderson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.6.2-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mattias Pantzare Cc: Anthony Atkielski , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: FreeBSD: Server or Desktop OS? References: <20021116232242.S23359-100000@hub.org> <04f801c28e20$0a3665b0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <3DD7CF81.7030407@cream.org> <056001c28e60$2af21cf0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <1037560276.1094.19.camel@skalman.campus.luth.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS perl-11 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Mattias Pantzare wrote: > > Of course, the ideal would be for the developers to stress-test the OS, > > since they wrote it. Apparently that doesn't happen for FreeBSD. One of > > the unfortunate consequences of open source, I suspect. > > You simply can't stresstest to the point that customers won't find > problems anyway. That is why the closed source companies have > betatesters and releases betas to the public.That is realy not an open > vs closed source argument at all. > Yes, it's probably impossible to think that we could find all bugs before the release happens, but I do think that al ot more could be done. I said once a long time ago, that FreeBSD needs a group of volunteers willing to do their share at finding bugs - this has to be an organized group of people, not just a "go ahead and find bugs, no one is stopping you" sort of thing. Finding bugs in hardware has the same problems, and all developers that have jobs that depend on the quality of the product do "verification" on their products. Anyway, I still say everyone should realize that in order to make -STABLE as reliable as it sounds, and -RELEASE more rock solid than it has ever been, we need to have a group of people running their standard tests on it before releases go out. Eric To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message