From owner-freebsd-current Wed Mar 4 18:18:41 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA26871 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 18:18:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from smtp04.primenet.com (smtp04.primenet.com [206.165.6.134]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA26852; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 18:18:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tlambert@usr07.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp04.primenet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA29514; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 19:18:32 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr07.primenet.com(206.165.6.207) via SMTP by smtp04.primenet.com, id smtpd029440; Wed Mar 4 19:18:25 1998 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr07.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id TAA02300; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 19:18:19 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199803050218.TAA02300@usr07.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Donations.u To: Brian_Beattie@Atlas.com (Brian Beattie) Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 02:18:18 +0000 (GMT) Cc: jkh@FreeBSD.ORG, jak@cetlink.net, dyson@FreeBSD.ORG, chuckr@glue.umd.edu, current@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: from "Brian Beattie" at Mar 4, 98 12:44:56 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I would agree, and in any case, an entity with a large chunck of money > and a specific feature in mind would be better off funding the effort > directly. The concern I would have if I were a company that funded some work outside the management of FreeBSD proper would be whether or not, when completed, the work would be committed back to the mainline FreeBSD, such that it would appear and be maintained in subsequent releases. If there were a way to fund this under the management of FreeBSD proper, it would go a long way toward alleviating this concern. Example: XYZ Corporation funds SMP work to the point of getting fine grain parallelism operating with little or no UP impact. But in doing this, makes a number of architectural changes that could either have been done another way, or which have NULL value to any UP systems, one way or the other. The core team decides that SMP support is not important enough to swallow the bitter architectural changes along with the sweet SMP. Where does this leave the company who funded the work? At best, they have an ongoing maintenance nightmare; at worst, FreeBSD incorporates conflicting and divergent changes, which render any advancement by FreeBSD inaccessible to the company. I think this is why there is such a push in the postings for FreeBSD proper to manage funded projects. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message