Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 18 Jun 2002 11:00:53 -0500
From:      John Prince <johnp@lodgenet.com>
To:        Fred Clift <fclift@verio.net>
Cc:        John Prince <johnp@lodgenet.com>, <stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: ATA Atapi 4.6 Release 
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20020618104548.02249c00@popmail.ct.lodgenet.com>
In-Reply-To: <20020618092610.M32141-100000@vespa.dmz.orem.verio.net>
References:  <5.1.0.14.2.20020617112839.030a9ff8@popmail.ct.lodgenet.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello Fred.
Thank you for your comment. I partially agree with you.

 >It appears that your bias is towards stability at the expense of
 >innovation (I realize that they need not be not mutually exclusive).
 >Other's bias is toward getting new features at the expense of some
 >compatibility.

<Grin>  4.6-release should be of a stable nature, when released, should it not?
While I agree not all bugs can be removed, this one hurts..  There is a 
temporary
solution that will, minimally band-aid the problem until an actual fix is 
committed.
Innovation, or "New Features" should not compromise the functionality of 
existing
and "standard" hardware.

Yes I may be a corporate user, I am also a developer, and have been 
using/supporting
FreeBSD for  8+ years.  Stereo-typing the "end User" is not the problem, 
nor is it a solution.

--john

At 09:38 AM 6/18/2002 -0600, Fred Clift wrote:
>On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, John Prince wrote:
>
> >
> > If not, can someone reply as to why the stability of FreeBSD was
> > compromised in favor of an improved method, that does not quite have
> > the bugs out of it..
>
>
>Well, in response to this, I can give you my conjecture.  There are
>differing viewpoints on what FreeBSD is all about.  There are many
>different ways to classify FreeBSD users, but for the moment think of them
>as 'corporate users' and as 'os developers'.
>
> From the corporate side, people tend to want predictable release dates, a
>very codified, process driven system for handling bugs, 'full' stability,
>backward compatibility etc.
>
>For the developer side, FreeBSD is about doing cool things with the
>operating system of your computer.  Making things work better/nicer, or
>just experimenting etc.
>
>I would say that over time, the corporate-type people have become more
>influential in the project and the world has changed in such a way as to
>make 'change' harder.
>
>It appears that your bias is towards stability at the expense of
>innovation (I realize that they need not be not mutually exclusive).
>Other's bias is toward getting new features at the expense of some
>compatibility.
>
>In this particular case, the ata-drivers are a two-edged sword.  People
>want them so they can hot-plug ata devices (especially raid devices),
>which the new framework/driver allows.
>
>One could argue that it might have been better to mfc earlier (ie right
>after 4.5-R) or wait till after 4.6-R so that the most time possible for
>working out these kinks could be used.  I dont know what factors
>accompanied the timing of the MFC but I think that if we were going to do
>it at all, we just had to pick a time and do it.  Never could all the bugs
>be worked out between any two releases, even with the most optimal timing,
>so if we want the new code at all, we just have to bite the bullet and
>work with it.
>
>Fred
>
>
>
>--
>Fred Clift - fclift@verio.net -- Remember: If brute
>force doesn't work, you're just not using enough.
>
>
>To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
>with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5.1.0.14.2.20020618104548.02249c00>