Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 15:51:57 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@freefall.cdrom.com> To: Peter Dufault <dufault@hda.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Minutes of the Thursday, April 13th core team meeting in Berkeley. Message-ID: <12800.798418317@freefall.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 19 Apr 95 20:12:06 EDT." <199504200012.UAA07776@hda.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Also, in Jordan's e-mail there was something that implied perhaps > FreeBSD should consider reducing its standards, since all we do is > think about releasing quality stuff until it reaches a fever point > where we push out the garbage (yes, I'm paraphrasing a little), > "after all, look at Linux". > > I say: NO NO A THOUSAND TIMES NO. I meant no such implication. I simply stated that our current "high standards" are essentially MEANINGLESS because we always abandon the high ground at the last minute with a panic release. Clearly, releases must happen often. Also clearly, we must have high standards. Our current model isn't working. I doubt that the "Linux model" would work for us either, I simply pointed to it to illustrate another point, which was that the measure of *success* is in picking a model that's successful and sticking with it. Linux has picked a model that's successful for them, and they're sticking with it. We've picked a model that doesn't work (be really fussy then panic) and we're struggling to make the best of it. This sucks. WE NEED TO DO THIS DIFFERENTLY, AND WHAT I NEED ARE MORE WELL-THOUGHT-OUT SUGGESTIONS AND ACTUAL MENTAL ACTIVITY ON THE PART OF THOSE INVOLVED RATHER THAN SIMPLE, EASY-TO-CAST CRITICISMS! Excuse my caps, but I'm getting kinda sick of this. Everybody wants to criticise our driving but nobody wants to take a turn at the wheel or start offering genuinely helpful and constructive directions on where to steer. I don't mean to overtly criticise Peter himself too much here, he's just one example of the syndrome I'm talking about here. Everyone is readily willing to join in bandying phrases like "commercial quality" and "well supported" about, but very few are willing to genuinely sit down for an hour or two and REALLY THINK about what that means! What's involved in constructing a project who's real goal is that level of quality with an almost entirely volunteer workforce? What happens when it's not _everybody's_ goal? How do you reconcile the differences in methodologies between the joy-riding hackers and the staid "just make it work right" old farts from commercial backgrounds? Both have valuable contributions to make, so you can't just try and force everyone into one camp or the other. The suggestions I've generally gotten so far have either been too simplistic or unaware of the larger issues (e.g. "just do xxx and all your problems will be solved") to use. I'm still waiting for someone who'll really put in the time with me to step forward and help put a more genuine organization together. Our situation right now is typical of most "startups" in that we have many more indians than chiefs. It's getting kinda lonely up here! I'd sure appreciate it if somebody who was actually REALLY GOOD at management would come forward and take my place so that I could get back to the business of hacking on this stuff and stop having to answer emails on issues like this! Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?12800.798418317>