Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2008 22:46:18 -0500 From: Paul Schmehl <pschmehl_lists@tx.rr.com> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3 Message-ID: <1CB0175143266C386F4593B9@Macintosh.local> In-Reply-To: <d763ac660806062341lf4cb4c7rfdd9276077940640@mail.gmail.com> References: <9B7FE91B-9C2E-4732-866C-930AC6022A40@netconsonance.com> <6010676B-91B0-4AF8-ACF8-039A59B29331@netconsonance.com> <200806050248.59229.max@love2party.net> <B9B83C12-7130-490D-A4BE-0469711B24DC@netconsonance.com> <20080605083907.GD1028@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <902E9703E6E50776A17E9F92@utd65257.utdallas.edu> <20080605220244.GP1028@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <34E9F0D46D7B9F45EDA38F4C@utd65257.utdallas.edu> <86tzg6aeye.fsf@ds4.des.no> <5B0709D83455470DA46533C4@Macintosh.local> <d763ac660806062341lf4cb4c7rfdd9276077940640@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--==========931817CF8F8B8EBAF4D1========== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline --On June 7, 2008 2:41:32 PM +0800 Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> = wrote: > 2008/6/7 Paul Schmehl <pschmehl_lists@tx.rr.com>: > >> Not only is this wrong, but it completely misses the point. Why should >> Jo have to upgrade to find out if his servers will fail under the >> conditions already articulated in existing, unresolved PRs that affect >> hardware that he is presently using? That's a bit like saying, "Buy >> this new car. Sure it has bugs that could easily directly affect you, >> but what's the chance you'll encounter them? in the off chance that >> they do, then you can help us resolve them." > > The software is Free. The car was Bought (or suggested to be bought.) > > Re-visit the analogy with a free car that a friend wants to give you. > (Car analogies suck.) > Yes, they do. It was the best I could come up with on the spur of the=20 moment. > >> Trust me. From a server admin's perspective, a bug affects you if it >> exists in hardware you use. Whether or not you're actually using the >> OS is completely irrelevant. Upgrading to the OS would be foolhardy. >> Even testing it on a handful of boxes will not prove that it won't fail >> under load in production. Anyone who has done testing knows it can >> only simulate, not duplicate, the conditions under which production >> servers run. I personally have experienced catastrophic failures after >> extensive testing that revealed no problems. > > You're using free software. This translates to "lots of people have > put in a lot of effort to provide something to the community which > they can use, at no cost, if it suits them." > Of course. What it *shouldn't* translate to is STFU and eat our dog food=20 or go somewhere else. >> >> I've lectured enough. If anyone doesn't get the point by now further >> explanation isn't going to help. > > I still don't think you get it. FreeBSD is a community. A community > works when enough people contribute positively towards furthering the > goals of the project. Jo is a user. He sounds like he is using it in > some reasonably critical and money-earning roles. Jo can participate > by testing stuff on test hardware, reporting back issues and working > with the community. Bitching about there being no long-term support > for releases isn't constructive. Some developer comments may not be > constructive either, but this is a -community project-. Join the > -community- and help out. > Here's a hint for you. Jo already contributes. So do I. Furthermore,=20 both of us deeply appreciate the work that the developers do to produce=20 FreeBSD and have stated so repeatedly. > It doesn't matter if running a long-term support project would be > beneficial for a certain subset of the userbase, its a losing > situation to cater to them unless they somehow contribute back to the > community. > This is precisely the attitude that I am objecting to. Translated for the = average user it states, "If you're using and not contributing, then shut=20 up. You haven't earned the right to complain." Open source projects are not free. They cost the developers in time and=20 effort. They also cost the users in dealing with untested bugs, dealing=20 with making many disparate pieces of software work together rather than=20 using a fully integrated commercial package. Open source projects also have benefits. Developers get the benefit of a=20 huge plus on their resumes. This translates directly into increased=20 income for some of them and could for all of them. They also benefit from = intangibles such as the pride of a job well done, the respect of their=20 peers and the admiration of their users. Users get benefits as well.=20 They get to use a system that works better than many commercial products=20 and has a great deal more flexibility. But don't think for one minute that open source is free for users and only = costs developers. Neither "side" deserves to be insulted and talked down to. Maybe some developers need to quit. If the work is so difficult and=20 stressful that they can't behave in a professional manner, perhaps it's an = indication that they've overextended themselves and need to take a step=20 back. There are few that have displayed an attitude that clearly states=20 that they think they are doing all the contributing and users are doing=20 nothing. Nothing could be further from the truth. Paul Schmehl If it isn't already obvious, my opinions are my own and not those of my employer. --==========931817CF8F8B8EBAF4D1==========--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1CB0175143266C386F4593B9>