From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Jan 20 13:13:33 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtppop3pub.verizon.net (smtppop3pub.gte.net [206.46.170.22]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FC2837B401; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 13:13:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from gte.net (evrtwa1-ar4-145-186.dsl.gtei.net [4.34.145.186]) by smtppop3pub.verizon.net with ESMTP ; id PAA94535680 Sat, 20 Jan 2001 15:07:53 -0600 (CST) Received: (from res03db2@localhost) by gte.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA24203; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 13:11:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from res03db2@gte.net) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 13:11:58 -0800 From: Robert Clark To: Brett Glass Cc: Terry Lambert , Greywolf , Jeremy Lea , Kris Kirby , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, netbsd-advocacy@NetBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why did NetBSD and FreeBSD diverge? Message-ID: <20010120131158.C24023@darkstar.gte.net> References: <200101191858.LAA12713@usr08.primenet.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20010119212205.04417840@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.4i In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010119212205.04417840@localhost>; from brett@lariat.org on Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 09:51:56PM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 09:51:56PM -0700, Brett Glass wrote: > At 11:58 AM 1/19/2001, Terry Lambert wrote: > > >Brett is a nice example here; if I had to psycho-analyze him > >(which I don't have the credentials to do, despite having helped > >several people study for a Master's in Psychiatric Socialwork, > >and having read everything they've read), I'd say that Brett is > >still here because FreeBSD is the closest social organization to > >what he wants to have come into existance. He can agree or he > >can disagree, that's only my opinion right now, with the evidence > >at hand. > > Actually, there are other social structures that I'd prefer for an > open source operating system project. Start a project. (I intend to.) The evolution of social structures doesn't have to end here. The value of opensource software doen't have to end with operating systems. I work with the BSDs because > they are technologically sophisticated and their licensing (unlike > that of Linux) is ethical. I am greatly concerned about the BSDs' > reliance on the GNU toolchain and (in some cases) on GNU userland > utilities. FreeBSD uses the most GNU software, and this disturbs > me because it puts it most at the mercy of an organization whose > agenda requires the ultimate destruction of all alternatives -- > including all of the BSDs. How long does it take for something as big as FreeBSD to make even a small course change? Big ships have big rudders. Steady, long term, positive interaction with the project may cause and outcome you like. Maybe not. In regard to GNU; The processor is closed source. The operating system is open source. The line between has to be drawn somewhere? In a way, I'm supprised that the instruction set isn't licensed. > > I work with FreeBSD a fair amount of the time because it has > features that I often need. (When size or simplicity is an issue, > I use NetBSD or OpenBSD, because they remain closer to the > KISS philosophy that was prevalent at CSRG. Also, I can > squash their kernels and userlands into a smaller space, which > is helpful for some of the embedded applications I do.) I > monitor these lists because I need to keep informed about > features, security advisories, etc. I participate in the > conversations here because I can sometimes be helpful to fellow > users and administrators and often learn things. The pissing > contests I endure on the lists are their biggest drawback. You learn from people, the products of people, or from the pissing match. What else is there? > > I'd like to influence the future direction and philosophy > of FreeBSD, but even simple and seemingly obvious suggestions > in these areas seem to be met with strong resistance. The > "leaders" are so territorial and resistant to outside > suggestions that they'll reject ideas that come from outside > the core group -- and, in particular, from me because > I've been labeled as "dangerous." In this context, how dangerous can an idea be? I imagine that depends on the idea, and the target audience for the idea. So, my best success has come > when I've been able to get one of those leaders to say, "That's > a great idea; glad I thought of it!" Unfortunately, the kinds > of ideas that can be introduced via this technique are > limited. The absolute WORST way to bring up an idea, I've > found, is on the mailing lists -- which is a shame because > they're the community's primary avenues of communication. > Maybe being a martyr is your cause? Maybe the reality of the situation can't be aproximated in email? Maybe you suffer from the same issues as the "leaders"? Do I mean to suggest these things? No, they could all apply to any of us. It just seems that what people say differs more than what people *are*. If this project is different things to different people, it only follows that what people say will never agree. > I'd like to be able to make suggestions directly rather than > being forced to adopt "stealth" techniques, but it doesn't > seem possible with the current social climate or leadership. > The egos are too strong and the combative nature of some of > the key players prevents it. I hold out a faint hope that > there could be open, honest, relaxed, and less ego-laden > discussion, but sure don't see it on the horizon anytime soon, > at least for FreeBSD. Can a person offer a suggestion, without actually hoping that the suggestion be taken? Doesn't a unsolicited suggestion then always seek to change someone's will? To force someone's hand? > > --Brett > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message Thanks for the chance to interact, if even in email, [RC] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message