Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 21:51:33 +0200 (MET DST) From: Eivind Eklund <eivind@nic.follonett.no> To: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Commercial vendors registry Message-ID: <199704151951.VAA01663@nic.follonett.no> In-Reply-To: <19970414212122.VV36149@uriah.heep.sax.de> from J Wunsch at "Apr 14, 97 09:21:22 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[Joerg Wunsch] > [John Dyson] > > You mean a central group of people who are trying to maintain quality and > > branding (FreeBSD)? Or a bunch of distributions with a bunch of different > > combinations of shared libs and apps (and kernel versions, Linux)? I prefer > > a coherent development path/group. It is pretty good that we have > > 70+- committers that can modify the tree directly, and don't have chaos. > > In fact, we are pretty well organized. > > I've also done commercial software development at my previous > employer, and i must now say that the degree of organization, the CVS > repository maintenance (hi Peter :), the quality of the resulting > code, the general mutual agreement of how things are done, etc. are > _way_ advanced compared to the commercial development. I'll just second this. I've done commercial development with seven or eight companies (counting consultancy work), with organisations ranging in size from 3 persons to >10,000 persons. I've done both development for internal use and for sale in the commercial marketplace. I've yet to see anybody with better quality of development than FreeBSD, or with a significantly better infrastructure. I've seen cases of better leadership, but the overall quality has always been worse. "Pay enough money, and you will get the best people. Give away an ideal, and you will get the best work of the best people." to quote somebody on the lists earlier.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704151951.VAA01663>