From owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 13 03:59:20 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D19F416A4CF for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:59:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from salvador.pacific.net.sg (salvador.pacific.net.sg [203.120.90.219]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AA70943D2F for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:59:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from oceanare@pacific.net.sg) Received: (qmail 12810 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2005 03:59:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO maxwell2.pacific.net.sg) (203.120.90.192) by salvador with SMTP; 13 Feb 2005 03:59:17 -0000 Received: from [192.168.0.109] ([210.24.124.198]) by maxwell2.pacific.net.sg with ESMTP <20050213035916.ZFOR1207.maxwell2.pacific.net.sg@[192.168.0.109]>; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 11:59:16 +0800 Message-ID: <420ED112.80401@pacific.net.sg> Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 12:01:22 +0800 From: Erich Dollansky Organization: oceanare pte ltd User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org References: <20050213004204.GA91920@xor.obsecurity.org> <20050213021055.69766.qmail@web53901.mail.yahoo.com> <20050213022605.GA24426@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20050213022605.GA24426@xor.obsecurity.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: stheg olloydson cc: kris@obsecurity.org Subject: Re: The only worthwhile logo-related comments so far.... X-BeenThere: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Evangelism List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:59:21 -0000 Hi, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sat, Feb 12, 2005 at 06:10:55PM -0800, stheg olloydson wrote: > > >>Core being Core will do what they think is best, and they have every >>right to. That's not my point. My point is the discussion took place in >>secret. What I am suggesting is that when certain discussions take >>place that they be publicly readable. > > > Again, FreeBSD has never worked that way, but if you think it should > then you should raise the suggestion with core. > Could this be the real reason for the "acceptance" problem? In the same moment, this is also the reason for its strengths. A small number of people "controls" FreeBSD giving it a direction they think is best. This concept is what companies do not understand. If companies use Linux, they do it because it "comes" from IBM or any other big vendor. If something goes wrong they go back to the vendor with the big name. I do not see FreeBSD make bigger waves as long as this does not change not matter what name or logo FreeBSD uses. So, why do it then? Erich