Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 02 Aug 2012 11:33:19 -0700
From:      Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
To:        David Chisnall <theraven@freebsd.org>
Cc:        FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: On cooperative work [Was: Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..]
Message-ID:  <501AC7EF.4070605@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <C84BFA15-9FEA-49E8-919A-F4A810EAAF09@freebsd.org>
References:  <CACqU3MUh1XPScRHNc-ivOYLmbG0_UqpwBNWeoPA84uSOESH_bg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-FndCHxpTfc%2Bb5zgiX2NheaQN1LcJXBRubef4_GAYCy_pb2g@mail.gmail.com> <CACqU3MWo=ieaduuwZDF6SfzUUS5y1qzP5e2Ddg6Aphnz_O2PJw@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-FndCDpD3rnQFwiOSGofP9cPCxC5Zo%2BPLfxALY8pnE=2HQMA@mail.gmail.com> <CACqU3MW2JEtDK0Ngdf_Br6D%2BVvdU1B9LmN0fm0F9=bG0f2iW4Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-VmomhHxG8t9Sw7de%2BzUnbz0O5GSY4ifpHFtCb9JS_zS0rBA@mail.gmail.com> <CACqU3MUKGcy8rNz0FcZLVat49BmRLD3hVKX%2BOXxkzwRDugKtAw@mail.gmail.com> <612DA8A3-121E-4E72-9E5B-F3CBA9DEB7F7@bsdimp.com> <CACqU3MU-WyNFf5UZGx15m_HWBx_6W272qkfqHHJ8G7v%2BJCK2Sw@mail.gmail.com> <FAE07410-CA99-4061-856F-799DB9D225BE@bsdimp.com> <501A0258.4010101@FreeBSD.org> <CA622462-DB69-40E4-9E1D-A4D83AEB12F8@theravensnest.org> <501AAEF2.8060202@FreeBSD.org> <DB8DF40B-BEFE-4BA3-A79B-27E2ECA31DC3@FreeBSD.org> <501AB8C0.3020102@FreeBSD.org> <AD003A7C-E122-4C8E-8EC6-E83AA1163610@freebsd.org> <501ABD43.5090604@FreeBSD.org> <C84BFA15-9FEA-49E8-919A-F4A810EAAF09@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 08/02/2012 11:12, David Chisnall wrote:
> FreeBSD is a volunteer project.

Yeah, I get that. I've been around quite a bit longer than you have, in
case you didn't notice. :)

I understand what you're saying, it's going to take work to change this
mindset, and to provide these resources. If you read my posts on a
factual basis, I'm not suggesting that the dev summits provide remote
participation at the same level as groups like the IETF or ICANN do, and
your point (and Warner's) that these groups have significant financial
backing is well taken.

However, my point is that in spite of the fact that it's non-trivial,
the mindset on this topic needs to change if the dev summits are going
to continue to be significant focii of both work being done and
decisions being made (which of course, they are).

What I'm *not* doing is demanding that any one person, or even any one
group take responsibility for solving the whole problem on their own.
Unfortunately, due to my inability to actually attend these meetings, I
won't be able to provide the kind of hands-on assistance that I'd like
to be able to. However it sounds like there may be financial resources
available through the foundation, which would go a long way towards
making a solution possible.

The next step would be for people to agree that this is a problem that
*needs* to be solved, followed by willingness on the part of dev summit
organizers to support these efforts, which will hopefully lead to people
who are willing and interested to step up and actually provide
solutions. It's already been true in the past that various companies
have volunteered to do this. There is no reason to believe that it
wouldn't happen again if organizers are willing to be supportive.

What I'm hearing so far is defensiveness, and an attempt to focus the
discussion on me. Neither is helpful. :) Acknowledging that this is a
problem that needs to be solved does not imply that by not solving it
you personally have failed in some way. I apologize if anything I've
written so far has implied otherwise.

Doug

-- 

    I am only one, but I am one.  I cannot do everything, but I can do
    something.  And I will not let what I cannot do interfere with what
    I can do.
			-- Edward Everett Hale, (1822 - 1909)



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?501AC7EF.4070605>