Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 11:36:06 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams) Cc: terry@lambert.org, nate@mt.sri.com, jkh@time.cdrom.com, jehamby@lightside.com, jsigmon@www.hsc.wvu.edu, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 2.2.x release question Message-ID: <199610171836.LAA06227@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199610171744.LAA18866@rocky.mt.sri.com> from "Nate Williams" at Oct 17, 96 11:44:47 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> [ Me breaking the tree in the name of 'progress', but passing off the > responsibility of fixing it on others. > ] > > > > Needless to say, this attitude won't buy me any friends. > > > > Nonsense. I fully support you, if you can show that this is truly "the > > right direction". I kind of doubt you can do that, but I'm willing > > to give you the benefit of the doubt. > > It *is* the right direction, but it might not be the 'best' > implementation. (As a matter of fact, it isn't. :) > > Doing things for the 'right reason' is *rarely* a good way to run a > business. It is if they are the right things... Guy Kawasaki in _The Macintosh Way_ made the following distinctions: 1) Doing the wrong thing the wrong way 2) Doing the right thing the wrong way 3) Doing the wrong thing the right way 4) Doing the right thing the right way Your change, since you've characterized it as "not the best implementation", falls into category 2. ISO 9000 for the sake of the process rather than for the sake of the result, falls into category 3 (for the record, I would never suggest ISO 9000 simply to get ISO 9000). Many people see a problem with the FreeBSD process architecture (the architecture of the process whereby FreeBSD is worked on, not the architecture of processes which are running within the OS). That places FreeBSD firmly in category 1 or category 2. We should all agree (if we are in fact sane) that we want to be in category 4. Now, you've put up several strawmen: so what would you suggest as the best method of moving the FreeBSD process architecture into category 4? > > We all know that true progrees comes only trough revolution, not evolution; > > if we didn't believe this, we'd all be doing our research SCO, since > > their CDROM is $20 cheaper than the FreeBSD CDROM. > > And the fact that you can't do research w/out access to source code > makes it almost wholly impossible. Really depends on if you have a source license for SVR4 (some of us do), and if you are totally unwilling to consider Linux or one of the other BSD's (some of us aren't). Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610171836.LAA06227>