From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 12 17:37:01 2005 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 0092016A4CE for ; Sat, 12 Mar 2005 17:37:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.198]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CC8E43D3F for ; Sat, 12 Mar 2005 17:37:00 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from alfredoj69@gmail.com) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 70so1275938wra for ; Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:37:00 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:date:from:to:subject:message-id:x-mailer:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Eh2BRjKES3u1eR6MDC+AbALwgHYRDvl9XyLclkh05SjzuWBHrrCTA2lQj7sUE8tA6XJqzGhazcleP4yachvKM03muBljS8pqVlpcE/OLsn0x5niQWCcT7d+XCrw5mHpMCHcDnatwlC4kGHi+LMbRamY93myI1NEV3c0MRK6BnCM= Received: by 10.54.36.37 with SMTP id j37mr3459303wrj; Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:36:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([70.24.135.21]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id 45sm1488661wri.2005.03.12.09.36.53; Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:36:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 12:38:40 -0500 From: Aperez To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-Id: <20050312123840.19848c79.alfredoj69@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.9.5 (GTK+ 2.4.14; i386-portbld-freebsd5.3) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Why not? 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: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 17:37:01 -0000 Hello everybdody I read an interview of Linus Torvald made by Linux Magazine. In that interv= iew Linus mentioned the following: "On the other hand, no, Linux does not have that stupid notion of having to= tally separate kernel development for different issues. If you want a secur= e BSD, you get OpenBSD; if you want a usable BSD, you get FreeBSD; and if y= ou want BSD on other architectures, you get NetBSD. That___s just idiotic, = to have different teams worry about different things." I dont want to critize what Linus stated above. However, I find a very vali= d point when he says that every BSD version team is woking in different dir= ections. My question is this: Why not all three teams work together for just one BSD version?=20 At the moment there are three groups of developers and users working in the= same issues. I think if we should all work together and create well rounde= d BSD version for us users and corporate clients. Imagine a BSD version tha= t is portable (NetBSD), that is very secured (OpenBSD) and that is a good D= estop solution (FreeBSD).