Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 15:14:09 -0600 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>, "Jay Nelson" <jdn@acp.qiv.com>, <freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: jkh@cdrom.com Subject: FreeBSD Distributions: Leveling the playing field Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.19990912145908.04af73a0@localhost> In-Reply-To: <000001befd61$6769baf0$021d85d1@youwant.to> References: <4.2.0.58.19990912134942.04a5d7a0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 01:57 PM 9/12/99 -0700, David Schwartz wrote: > Bluntly, if two things are not equally good, it is not sensible to treat >them equally. Would you apply that statement to human beings in general? If so, who is to judge the "quality" of the human being? Or to say that he or she should be treated differently -- i.e. deprived of rights -- because he or she is not of sufficient "quality?" In the more specific case of the FreeBSD project and creators of FreeBSD distributions: Does it make sense to favor large companies over small ones? Or older ones over newcomers? Or established but less daring distributions over ones that try to "push the envelope?" If a distribution has more bugs or problems than another (perhaps because it attempted to add great new features), but is working to improve, should it be penalized in any other way than by the marketplace? IMHO, the answer to all of the questions in the paragraph immediately above is a resounding "no." FreeBSD, Inc. should set a level playing field for all would-be distributors, and then allow the marketplace to reward or penalize the products based on user experience. This is what is occurring in the Linux world, and it works fantastically. --Brett Glass To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.2.0.58.19990912145908.04af73a0>