From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 21 23:48:56 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C322A106564A; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 23:48:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jfvogel@gmail.com) Received: from mail-gx0-f172.google.com (mail-gx0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 524BB8FC08; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 23:48:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by gxk28 with SMTP id 28so4034686gxk.17 for ; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 15:48:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=khh5zA5+VCqz2G8QQq0ubd48/6xiwmxU0Ollj1YsUWI=; b=BWGRflDHJwlZ/6sQyzs8Lakz24shKROJ5affglPgHBhFHeOwbMrQfbkzfLoCMfafPP 82KfecGD6aZCgOXIEpkhmh5mZgW54sp8dnE4DbMAVWL3UlgM22Md1l51fZrgJCyHhWfp rYqJgD1sPwdDB9DRb6iGqDu0yD/ZZewUOU5Rc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=MhBbJW5YQ0EvvOntijyQP0/V9Krc6HGduMW4Q+3USnGdFG14eWXZuuM/GB6V3R2K+W 4SAKf61dZ8sQpOo6W+l7X3emIoLx2G4lu1djdftleoQN3XQrtT5bcJ9+JIVsMcCVsB6j rWyKsEvILg+32DaK2xrUzYsNecA7T3kBpSnAg= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.150.215.2 with SMTP id n2mr9513462ybg.55.1292973960433; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 15:26:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.147.181.8 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 15:26:00 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <0626B045-E0D7-4875-8B72-9CC705BD133D@FreeBSD.org> References: <9194.1292972364@critter.freebsd.dk> <0626B045-E0D7-4875-8B72-9CC705BD133D@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 15:26:00 -0800 Message-ID: From: Jack Vogel To: "Robert N. M. Watson" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: mdf@freebsd.org, Poul-Henning Kamp , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Schedule for releases X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 23:48:56 -0000 >From my perspective its not so much the work of 'back porting', like my drivers that's trivial. The issue from a developer standpoint is support, its a lot of work to keep tests going on multiple releases, and when there are bugs worrrying about repro, etc.. I take my que mainly from customers, what they need, and how important that is to Intel, not sure if that's typical or atypical, but whichever :) Jack On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Robert N. M. Watson wrote: > > On 21 Dec 2010, at 22:59, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > > In message , > Robert Wats > > on writes: > > > >> Looking at 7.x, I'm struck by how much it has slowed down. There's a > >> significant user community, but not a significant developer community. > > > > This is a very important point to interpret correctly: > > > > FreeBSD is whatever its developers make it be. > > Agreed entirely. > > > A more structured and more desirabe option is to channel such funds > > through either the foundation or a commercial entity, who then pays > > developers to pay attention to 7.x > > > > Companies who use Open Source are not adverse to paying for the > > service they get, but somebody needs to make it easy for them. > > Yeah, I think we pretty much agree on this: someone needs to do the work > within the community. I don't doubt dozens of companies (if not many more) > are busy back-porting drivers locally to 6.x/7.x, etc, and it would be nice > to (a) amortize that cost, making it cheaper to use FreeBSD in said > products, and (b) get it out into the community so everyone benefits. It's > possible to imagine different models working there, and possibly more than > one at once. I think the obvious starting point actually is in the device > driver space, and possibly through the support efforts already being made in > companies. It's useful for our community, however, to discuss whether we > have any technical/social obstacles that would limit that (i.e., would > $vendor not like it if third parties maintained their drivers in branches > they no longer QA for), and whether we can take any specific actions to > support those efforts. > > There are lots of other factors involved here too, of course, but I think > there's probably some moderately accessible work that if done, will make the > world a better place :-). > > Robert_______________________________________________ > freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >