Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 17:33:07 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: jak@cetlink.net (John Kelly) Cc: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Donations. Message-ID: <199803050033.RAA13876@mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <3504f132.43945382@mail.cetlink.net> References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980304123946.19978E-100000@coyote.prepaid.atlas.com> <3500e925.41883882@mail.cetlink.net> <199803050007.RAA13519@mt.sri.com> <3504f132.43945382@mail.cetlink.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >> >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. > >> > >> That causes fragmentation and duplication of efforts. Collective > >> unity is better. > > > >Back that up with facts, or even explanations, please? > > If you have 50 contractors all working and paid independently, with > little or no knowledge of what the others are doing, duplication and > wasted effort is inevitable. On the other hand, a funded FreeBSD > could be a clearinghouse for better organization. And if these folks are working on FreeBSD, thus affecting one another and the rest of the project, why are they all of a sudden working in a vacuum when they get paid with commercial funs more so than when they work for free? Again, the argument has no merit. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199803050033.RAA13876>