From owner-freebsd-chat  Sun Feb 23 11:48:15 1997
Return-Path: <owner-chat>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA28925
          for chat-outgoing; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 11:48:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dyson.iquest.net (dyson.iquest.net [198.70.144.127])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA28920
          for <chat@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 11:48:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from root@localhost) by dyson.iquest.net (8.8.4/8.6.9) id OAA14020; Sun, 23 Feb 1997 14:43:40 -0500 (EST)
From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net>
Message-Id: <199702231943.OAA14020@dyson.iquest.net>
Subject: Re: RMS's view on dynamic linking
To: terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert)
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 14:43:40 -0500 (EST)
Cc: hoek@freenet.hamilton.on.ca, jkh@time.cdrom.com, terry@lambert.org,
        ben@narcissus.ml.org, nate@trout.mt.sri.com, chat@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <199702231850.LAA06545@phaeton.artisoft.com> from "Terry Lambert" at Feb 23, 97 11:50:46 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME8]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> 
> My point is that the project will steady-state at a given energy
> level.  If John did leave, why should we be satisfied with *one*
> someone stepping up to the task?
> 
In fact, I would be interested in even more collaboration on the
VM code, for example.  There is no reason that it just has to
be that DG and I have been doing most of it.  We have been getting
good help from others (incl. PHK for ideas, <alc@cs.rice.edu> and
others.)  As time goes on, much of the code that I have written will
be replaced, with other, greater ideas, and it is likely that the
person who does it will have worked or discussed it with me before
it happens.  But perhaps, I will have been long-gone, and the person
says to himself (like I said about the terribly broken clock algorithm),
"why in the h*ll did they do it that way?".

None of us is replaceable, and as long as we can manage the development
without it becoming chaotic or negative personality traits damaging
cooperation, we can continue to grow, slowly and deliberately.  Frankly,
adding more noise to our discussions is distracting.  Slow, deliberate
growth is preferable to someone who "thinks" he/she knows it all being
added and confusing things.  I think that we are doing pretty well in
that regard.  The FreeBSD team members (both -core and other contributors)
appear to take their trust seriously, and that seems to work fairly well
with only a few breakdowns once in a while.  But, what project doesn't
have problems here and there?

Of course, the conservativism(sp?) above has to be tempered so that
new, truely innovative ideas don't get squashed.

Oh well, I really don't know why I piped up on this discussion, other
than procrastinating working on the Lite/2 ext2fs....  Back to work!!! :-).

John