From owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 13 09:39:38 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 328AA16A4CE for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 09:39:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smp500.sitetronics.com (sitetronics.com [82.192.77.163]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8E5E43D4C for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 09:39:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dodell@sitetronics.com) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=UebiMiau) by smp500.sitetronics.com with asmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1D0GE1-0007x7-7d; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 10:39:33 +0100 Received: from client 82.72.18.239 for UebiMiau2.7 (webmail client); Sun, 13 Feb 2005 10:39:33 -0000 Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 10:39:33 -0000 From: "Devon H. O'Dell" To: "Erich Dollansky" , "Paul A. Hoadley" X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: UebiMiau 2.7.2 X-Original-IP: 82.72.18.239 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MSMail-Priority: Medium Importance: Medium Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The only worthwhile logo-related comments so far.... X-BeenThere: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: "Devon H. O'Dell" List-Id: FreeBSD Evangelism List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 09:39:38 -0000 --------- Original Message -------- From: Erich Dollansky To: Paul A. Hoadley Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The only worthwhile logo-related comments so far.... Date: 13/02/05 07:01 > > Hi, > > Paul A. Hoadley wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 02:30:59PM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote: > > > > > > are you really saying that you have had experiences where FreeBSD was > > rejected when it became clear that the project was steered by a small > > group of developers elected from a larger group of developers? That > > is, was the rejection based on a description of the core group concept > > specifically, or some larger issue of support? > > > > > I think with all that snipping - also done by me - my point got turned > to something very different. > > The point is the lack of a company supporting FreeBSD like IBM does for > Linux, is a reason for companies not to take FreeBSD as they cannot turn > back to that company if things go wrong. > > All the potential user sees is currently this small group called 'core' > which is obviously to small to give the same support like IBM - or any > other huge company - could give. > > Even if the support would be locally handled by some small company, the > potential customer just wants to be able to call the big boy in case > something goes the wrong way. We (OffMyServer) do commercially support FreeBSD for our customers. Commercially supporting every FreeBSD user is just not possible, though I know that wasn't your point. I just want to point out that there _are_ several companies out there who have interest in commercially supporting FreeBSD. > As mentioned before, I know that FreeBSD became what it is because core > exists. > > Erich --Devon