From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 29 22:39:43 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F263216A4CE for ; Tue, 29 Jun 2004 22:39:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CD5143D2F for ; Tue, 29 Jun 2004 22:39:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost.freebsd.dk [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i5TMdc5r011974; Wed, 30 Jun 2004 00:39:39 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: Vladimir Dyuzhev From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 29 Jun 2004 12:15:43 EDT." <40E195AF.4040104@sympatico.ca> Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 00:39:38 +0200 Message-ID: <11973.1088548778@critter.freebsd.dk> Sender: phk@critter.freebsd.dk cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADSUP: ibcs2 and svr4 compat headed for history X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 22:39:43 -0000 In message <40E195AF.4040104@sympatico.ca>, Vladimir Dyuzhev writes: >ehlo. > >> PHK's project appears to be a success, so maybe you could >> motivate someone with some financial contribution to >> freshen up the code and at least put it in a port-maintainable >> state? Just a suggestion. > > May be, it would be a good idea to create a public voting > site for FreeBSD, where interested customers/individuals > might vote for features they need AND offer a money for that? > > PHK's pilot project showed that money are there, people need > just some more direct way of paying it than buying boxed FreeBSD > distribution... I disagree with the first part and agree with the second. The reason I disagree with the first part is that it would be interpreted as a lottery under most jurisdictions since sending $20 towards ibcs2 only gives you a certain chance of ibcs2 improving, but no certainty (until you buy all the tickets in the lottery). I know this sounds harsh, but any sort of "tit for tat" should be handled at the single person level. At the project level all donations should come with only a minimal ear-marking and if so, ear-marking determined by project personel, not donor. What this means is that if some people can agree to donate $N towards ibcs2 development and find a developer who will do that for $N, then fine, they're go. If some entity, possibly a person in the project wants to hunt for donors based "I want to improve ibcs2", then that is fine too. The project doesn't handle money and the foundation can not accept earmarked donations _unless_ they do the earmarking. In other words they can solicit money for ibcs2 work, but you cannot send them money for ibcs2 work if they didn't ask for it. Poul-Henning -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.