Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 18:49:02 -0800 From: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> To: "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@over-yonder.net> Cc: Tom Evans <tevans.uk@googlemail.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org>, Hugo Silva <hugo@barafranca.com> Subject: Re: FreeBSD has serious problems with focus, longevity, and lifecycle Message-ID: <4F16331E.4000702@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20120117224123.GC509@over-yonder.net> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1112211415580.19710@kozubik.com> <jf3mps$is3$1@dough.gmane.org> <CAFHbX1%2Bi3JwCCBmqtOsW6m74VpDBSAmBOt7CPcCGAPCO2DBDkA@mail.gmail.com> <CAF-QHFV8oj=ipwcsVo3e3P3kgGBPr%2Bz1gRzn3D3PT%2Bc0pHJtcQ@mail.gmail.com> <4F15C48F.7020302@barafranca.com> <20120117224123.GC509@over-yonder.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1/17/12 2:41 PM, Matthew D. Fuller wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 06:57:19PM +0000 I heard the voice of > Hugo Silva, and lo! it spake thus: >> Come to think about it, those days are pretty much gone since 4.x >> (incidentally, many of us who've stuck with FreeBSD for this long >> think of 4.x as an epic series). > Having been a FreeBSD user for a very long time, I don't think of 4.x > as epic. I think of 5.x as a clusterf...un. 4.x didn't last such a > long time because everyone thought it was awesome, it was because the > next version was still so broken it was the only thing we had to > release. > 5 was not out on a limb for so long because it was a clusterfun, it was out there because it was a rework of how almost everything in the kernel worked. Everything written since 1978 had to be rewritten to some extent. >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F16331E.4000702>