From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 8 07:48:30 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0477010656D7 for ; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 07:48:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (pancho.soaustin.net [76.74.250.40]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD8798FC1E for ; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 07:48:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 3D3DF569A3; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 07:30:19 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 07:30:19 +0000 From: Mark Linimon To: vadim_nuclight@mail.ru Message-ID: <20100908073019.GA16493@lonesome.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: FreeBSD 6.4 and 8.0 EoLs coming soon X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010 07:48:30 -0000 > > The reason is performance for overall network stack, not ideology. > For a practical reasons, "it works but slow" is better than > "doesn't work at all (due to absence of code in the src tree)". > "Make it work. Make it right. Make it fast. In that order", know this? > Sacrificing "work" for "fast"?.. Hmm, if it is not ideology, then what is > it?.. It wasn't "it works but slow". It was "it works, but networking throughput is limited on the modern hardware that the majority of our users employ". In particular, IIUC, 10GB network drivers were suffering under the old strategy. We simply were not competitive with other OSes, and we have many multiples more users interested in 10GBE than in ISDN. > You do not understand the problem. It is not in notices & volunteers, but > rather in the Project's policy - delete something which could still work. You do not understand how this was handled. The situation was: an announcement was made that "in X months, all network drivers need to be made to run Giant-free so that FreeBSD can drop Giant from the neworking stack to move forward." Within that period, most of the drivers were updated. Repeated postings were made to the mailing list that "the following drivers still have not been converted, and need to be updated or they will be dropped." They weren't; they were droppped. So while it could "still" work, it was slowing down progress. The fact of the matter is, FreeBSD is a big project with a finite number of developers. We try to keep as much coverage of systems as we can, but a reality of any large software engineering project is that older features sometimes have to be dropped to make progress. The code still exists in the repository for any interested party to pick up and modernize. mcl