Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 18:43:19 +0100 From: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: freebsd - for the win Message-ID: <4C13C737.6050400@infracaninophile.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20100612153813.GA53180@guilt.hydra> References: <86eigdx6vl.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> <4C13320C.5090700@infracaninophile.co.uk> <20100612153813.GA53180@guilt.hydra>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 12/06/2010 16:38:13, Chad Perrin wrote: > On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 08:06:52AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote: >> >> Absolutely. Especially when you compare it to MacPorts and consider the >> disparity in numbers of users between MacOS and FreeBSD. Given that the >> ports is maintained by a bunch of volunteers basically in their spare >> time, the fact that it is consistently of good quality and that the >> popular packages are generally updated to the latest available versions >> within a couple of weeks -- frequently within a few hours -- >> it's a pretty astonishing accomplishment. > > I don't mean to belittle anyone's accomplishments, of course, but I don't > find it astonishing at all. FreeBSD's development model is one that > encourages people to develop what they use, and to use what they develop, > and it doesn't exclude people for rules of arbitrary hiring practices. > When your software is developed and/or maintained by way of a more > meritocratic system in which people are "eating their own dog food" and > the developers/maintainers are self-selected in large part because of > their *interest* in what they develop or maintain, it would be surprising > to me if something like FreeBSD *didn't* end up doing better than > something like MacOS X, which is developed and maintained under an > autocratic model wherein many of the developers and maintainers were > assigned to their respective projects (regardless of interest) after > being hired due to their resume bullet points (regardless of actual > ability). > > That's just my perspective. I suppose yours may differ. > You are entirely correct, as far as MacOS X itself goes, although I suspect that Apples' core developers are equally as interested in what they do as FreeBSD's. (Not least because there is quite a bit of overlap between those groups.) MacPorts however is not an official Apple controlled thing (although it does have Apple's full support). It's a volunteer project with maintainers and committers in very much the same roles as the equivalents for FreeBSD ports. Given that MacOS X has, what, about 5.8% of the entire world desktop userbase (compare: Linux 1.2%, FreeBSD not even on the graph according to Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems) they have so many more potential volunteers that even if their volunteering rate is an order of magnitude less, they'd still come out ahead. Cheers, Matthew - -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate JID: matthew@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkwTxzcACgkQ8Mjk52CukIxFdQCfUhFjfSJEQeItQTfTNzB3VB7q Z6oAniJgNZty/3pGatCqYlFrs5PnIJ0Z =FIZn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C13C737.6050400>