Date: Fri, 22 Sep 1995 03:18:12 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: kelly@fsl.noaa.gov (Sean Kelly) Cc: pechter@shell.monmouth.com, gryphon@healer.com, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeNix? Message-ID: <21713.811765092@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 21 Sep 1995 18:13:03 MDT." <9509220013.AA07421@emu.fsl.noaa.gov>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> And I got it, by golly. And I'm sticking with it. I'm not going to > use continue to use FreeBSD if it becomes FreeSVR4. It's *not* a > mistake to keep ourselves 4.4 compatible. That's a desirable feature! I think this thread had gotten a little out of hand (though I congradulate the principles for taking it to -chat rather than swamping -hackers - thank you!) but I can summarize my own attitude (and what I'll thus be "pushing" for) thusly: 1. A lot of BSD fans run BSD because they're used to the organization of the tree and it's one less headache for them in administrating large collections of machines. We should therefore strive to maintain some consistency with *ourselves*, if not some vaporous "BSD" standard, and this means no gratuitous changes for change's sake. 2. That said, if some change is *not* gratuitous and provides significant additional functionality or makes an admin's job easier, then we shouldn't throw it out just because it's new, different or looks suspiciously like what SYSV might have done. BSD is not or at least should not be a static, unchanging entity. That way lies stagnation and death. We need to continue to improve the product, and if that entails changing a few old and crufty mechanisms that were long overdue for replacement, then I say go for it. Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?21713.811765092>