From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 9 12:14:08 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 241F216A4CE for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2004 12:14:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web13901.mail.yahoo.com (web13901.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 08D0243D45 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2004 12:14:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from scosol@yahoo.com) Message-ID: <20040409191407.11538.qmail@web13901.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [64.242.144.226] by web13901.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 09 Apr 2004 12:14:07 PDT Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2004 12:14:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Nathan Seven To: Nathan Seven , avleeuwen@piwebs.com, freebsd-current@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20040409190530.11931.qmail@web13908.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii cc: Atte Peltomaki Subject: Re: Future of FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2004 19:14:08 -0000 --- Nathan Seven wrote: > >-- Arjan van Leeuwen wrote: > > On Friday 09 April 2004 00:45, Atte Peltomaki > wrote: > > > Hello FreeBSD users and developers! > > > > > > As an active FreeBSD user, I'm ever so > interested > > about the future > > > plans of FreeBSD and direction of developement. > > Many of the features > > > that 5.x taunts are very impressive. But as of > > late I have been > > > increasingly worried about the direction (or, > lack > > of direction) things > > > have been going. > > > This looks like a troll, and if it isn't, it > doesn't > > belong on this mailing > > list. Please don't feed the trolls. > > Hmmm- troll or no, I don't see it as a particularly > invalid question... > I have some of the same concerns myself- > Is there a specific "guidance" or "direction" list > that I should be subscribed to? > If not, this *would* be the proper place- no? Errr nevermind- I thought that the above was the entirety of the "troll" post ( I saw the rest- troll indeed). Anyway, I mentioned *I* had some of the same questions, I feel like I should clarify them- My questions have been in the management of the 5.x RELEASES- it's been quite some time since 5.0, and the 5.x series is still touted as "scary experimental stuff that will break"- I just think that's really hurt the adoption of it- For basic serverside stuff, bits like ACPI and sound aren't needed at all- Perhaps once the scheduling and pthread stuff has been solidified, a "stable base" release should be made? Meaning that the release as a whole should still be considered unstable, but using the as-shipped "stable" kernel config, things should be nice and solid? Anyway, just my 2 cents- I don't need a response or anything, just making my thoguhts known. ===== -- live- http://www.scosol.org/ to- AIM: IMFDUP _-jupiter accepts your offer-_