Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 20:52:41 +0000 (UTC) From: Vadim Goncharov <vadim_nuclight@mail.ru> To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD problems and preliminary ways to solve Message-ID: <slrnj5ddgp.4ck.vadim_nuclight@kernblitz.nuclight.avtf.net> References: <35765857-1314243257-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-329610575-@b2.c15.bise7.blackberry> <CAJ-Vmo=v0UkQarauKrvWKdjMTC81BwXmyhU__rnaQeL3z45L-g@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Adrian Chadd! On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 13:24:54 +0800; Adrian Chadd wrote about 'Re: FreeBSD problems and preliminary ways to solve': >>> Sure. And taking surveys into account, we could just simply summarize: >>> FreeBSD needs marketing :-) >> >> That begs the question of to whom FreeBSD should be marketed. Home users? Small-office admins? Datacenter admins? Embedded developers? >> >> Perhaps we can start from what is currently used/deployed. Easier to start from what we have done than figuring out what all it can do. What say ? > Pick your area of interest. Work on making it more useful. Be very > loud and vocal about what you're doing. Explain how it's better than > the alternatives. > What _I_ think the project needs is louder developers and advocates; > easier install/management tools (especially for VM/cluster management > ; ports is a pain in the ass as viewed by a lot of people - who think > RPM/DEB is fine (and have built large networks around such)) and some > more use cases where FreeBSD makes sense. > So, let's stop talking about it; pick something you think should be > better, run with it, and be very vocal about what you do. Glad to hear such words from @FreeBSD.org! Thanks! > The project as a whole may not necessarily need a "project dictator" > per se. It doesn't need to figure out who FreeBSD needs to be > marketed to. Here an interesting question arise, in the philosophy/VCS field. We see that Linux/git adopted model where "dictator" has, say, 17 lieutenant for key subsystems, and pulls changes from them, each of them have, say, 17 own subordinates from whose he pulls, and so on. Instead of that 17^2 people FreeBSD has the same 289 men directly commiting to repository. It is repository here which acts as a "dictator" from technical side, and that is definetely better (e.g. no "kill -SIGBUS Linus" factors). The difference is, those 289 key people in Linux *can* pull changes from lower tiers, but FreeBSD people - can't (of course not at all, but it is significantly harder to contribute here). It is a plain model. So then, as they are using DVCS in a semi-centralized way, there are mostly technical benefits for them, which we don't have with a purely centralized old-fashioned SVN. I still think that it may be worth creating a combined "centralized DVCS" for FreeBSD needs, mirroring FreeBSD workflow and free from git flaws (listed in wiki, such as need to split to many repos etc.). Given how git initially was created, this is not so hard as it could sound. The problem here is, that I don't know what typical workflow a FreeBSD commiter has, and what exact needs are. So even as idea it is still blurred... -- WBR, Vadim Goncharov. ICQ#166852181 mailto:vadim_nuclight@mail.ru [Anti-Greenpeace][Sober FreeBSD zealot][http://nuclight.livejournal.com]
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?slrnj5ddgp.4ck.vadim_nuclight>