Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 17:35:31 +0000 From: Paul Richards <paul@originative.co.uk> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: John Grimes <jegjr@erols.com>, Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>, Didier Derny <didier@omnix.net>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is FreeBSD dead ?(NO) Message-ID: <38CA83E3.BF8F39E3@originative.co.uk> References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10003110705560.33669-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer wrote: > > On Sat, 11 Mar 2000, John Grimes wrote: > > > On Fri, 10 Mar 2000, Wes Peters wrote: > > > > I don't entirely agree with the statement above. I would like to mention a > > point to ponder. In the 13th paragraph of the announcement on the > > FreeBSD.org website, I quote the following, "BSDI will continue to > > distribute packaged versions of FreeBSD...." Is this another way of saying > > that in the future that the distribution of FreeBSD may take on the Sun model > > for their "free" operating system software, which you pay $$$ for the media, and > > it is not freely downloadable from the net nor freely distributable? > > > This shows a lack of knowledg of the present set-up. > > Walnut creek is not presently responsible for FreeBSD, the FreeBSD source > or FreeBSD development. > The merger of WC and BSDI can not therefore change any of these > things. These things have been overseen by teh core-group and FreeBSD inc. It's interesting that everyone is jumping up and down worrying about the effect that the merger between BSDI and WC will have. As you say, in *theory* FreeBSD has nothing to do with WC and is a totally independent project. In practice however WC has manoeuvered their market position over the last few years to be the "FreeBSD company" rather than a seller of cdroms. It's worth noting that BSDI isn't merging with WC because they need a cdrom division, they're merging with WC because to all intents and purposes they own many of the assets of the FreeBSD project. Most of the resources of the project are held by WC and a fair number of the key developers are on the payroll. > > In the new picture this differentiation is even more marked. > > BSDI will rely on FreeBSD being successful, but they will not be > controlling it. > this in my mind is a very brave move, and one I wouldn't make lightly. > > The only thing WC is (was) responsible for is the agreement with FreeBSD > inc, (and the developers) that they are responsible for producing the CD > image and selling it. The cost of this to them is that they pay for > Jordan's time to produce actual snapshots to sell. > > Since WC didn't control any more than the server for the CVS tree, and > since we all have mirrors of that thanks to cvsup, if they decided to > make it unfree, then we as the FreeBSD development group would just > nominate a different central server and life would continue as before, ... > without them. I think a wait and see attitude is best for everyone here. Let's give WC and BSDI the benefit of the doubt and see how things unfold. The press releases all sound like they are along the right lines, in that a FreeBSD not for profit organisation will be set up and control of the project (including the trademark) will be passed over to it. All things I've been an advocate of for many years. Will all the core team members become directors in this new company? The devil is in the detail. If the core team is stuffed full of WC and BSDI employees, who have a responsibility to their employer as well as to the project, then there will clearly be conflicts of interest and an undoubted leaning to solutions and methods of management that fit the commercial interests of their employer. This is a fact of life, we all do it to different degrees and I wouldn't hold it against core members who did to some extent. The only concerns I have regarding this merger is whether the core team will remain impartial enough in it's decisions regarding the project and how much influence the new company will have on its decisions. It's a question of balance, given the resources that WC/BSDI will be putting behind the project it's to be expected they will wield some influence over what happens in the future, and it should be noted that some of these guys will have very pertinent input to the discussion given who they are. We should be careful though to make sure that the core team has the best interests of FreeBSD in mind when they make decisions. One of the things that they will need to be very careful of is a tendency to favour their employer when it comes to supporting commercial ventures. There are other people in the business who make a living out of FreeBSD and it would be damaging to the project as a whole if the core team became an advocate of WC/BSDI above all the other commercial companies who support FreeBSD. I have definate concerns in this area given that there is undoubtedly a bias to pushing WC FreeBSD products at the moment. I'd like to the see the core team being more prominent in promoting FreeBSD to other commercial backers, rather than continuing to push WC as the home of FreeBSD. Paul Richards. Originative Solutions Ltd To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?38CA83E3.BF8F39E3>