Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 15:21:57 -0700 From: Theo de Raadt <deraadt@cvs.openbsd.org> To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Adaptec AAC raid support Message-ID: <200503192221.j2JMLwop030477@cvs.openbsd.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 19 Mar 2005 15:15:03 MST." <423CA467.9050804@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I'm done with this thread. A closed binary managmeent app isn't ideal, > but it's better than nothing. I worked on it because I knew the > compromises I could make at the time and I wanted to give the FreeBSD > community something for it. I don't have infinite time and resources > to fight the noble causes like Theo does, and I think that cooperation > and comprise are better in the long run than constant conflict. If > Theo or anyone else wants help on making the kernel driver better, > let me know. If they want to help Adaptec follow through on it's > stated plan to release suitable tools in the near future, then stop > antagonizing them and making silly threats. The shouting and the > threats and all the other tripe reflect poorly on everyone, whether > you choose to see it or not, and _that's_ what I oppose in Theo, not > his passion for openness. That's what you oppose? And then just moments earlier you send a mail (shown below) in which you SPECIFICALLY cc the people at Adaptec, and you SPECIFICALLY oppose freedom? Scott Long, you do not believe in either openness or freedom. This is a sad sad day for FreeBSD. -- Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 13:50:51 -0700 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Ben Goren <ben@trumpetpower.com> CC: misc@openbsd.org, Doug Richardson <doug_richardson@adaptec.com> Subject: Re: Adaptec AAC raid support Ben Goren wrote: > On 2005 Mar 19, at 1:08 PM, Scott Long wrote: > >> Why is it so important to drag your users into your political fights >> by depriving them of stuff that works now but isn't exactly everything >> that you want? > > > Granted, I don't use RAID on any system at the moment, and haven't used > Adaptec products in the past. But I would hardly consider having to halt > the machine to even check the status of the array ``stuff that works.'' > > Would you be happy flying in a plane in perfect mechanical > condition...except that all diagnostic gauges (fuel level, oil pressure > and temperature, fire detectors, hydraulic pressure, etc.) only worked > when the plane was stationary on the ground? Would you go on a > transoceanic flight in such a plane? > > All I can say is that I'm damned thankful Adaptec doesn't make aircraft > equipment, if this is what they think of as ``stuff that works.'' > > And if this *were* aircraft equipment we were talking about, would you > still be chiding people for being pinned down by political beliefs on > the subject? > > This discussion is doing nothing but proving two things: > > A) Adaptec is suffering from an astounding lack of professionalism; and > > ii) Theo's pride of craftsmanship is something sorely lacking in the > rest of the computing world. > > Cheers, > > b& Do you ask for the blueprints to the plane before you get onboard? Do you demand that Ford or GM give you the source to the fuel ingector computer before you get into a car? I'm saying that resources are out there that will allow OpenBSD users to manage their RAID arrays RIGHT NOW. No, they don't meet the goals of open source, but they meet the goals of getting the job done. If not having the source is a problem, then that's your choice and you don't have to use it. But why deprive people of a choice, like Theo wants. Freedom is about choice. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200503192221.j2JMLwop030477>