Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 21:51:56 -0700 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, greywolf@starwolf.com (Greywolf) Cc: reg@FreeBSD.ORG (Jeremy Lea), kris@catonic.net (Kris Kirby), freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, netbsd-advocacy@NetBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why did NetBSD and FreeBSD diverge? Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010119212205.04417840@localhost> In-Reply-To: <200101191858.LAA12713@usr08.primenet.com> References: <Pine.NEB.4.21.0101182302040.583-100000@starwolf.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 11:58 AM 1/19/2001, Terry Lambert wrote: >Brett is a nice example here; if I had to psycho-analyze him >(which I don't have the credentials to do, despite having helped >several people study for a Master's in Psychiatric Socialwork, >and having read everything they've read), I'd say that Brett is >still here because FreeBSD is the closest social organization to >what he wants to have come into existance. He can agree or he >can disagree, that's only my opinion right now, with the evidence >at hand. Actually, there are other social structures that I'd prefer for an open source operating system project. I work with the BSDs because they are technologically sophisticated and their licensing (unlike that of Linux) is ethical. I am greatly concerned about the BSDs' reliance on the GNU toolchain and (in some cases) on GNU userland utilities. FreeBSD uses the most GNU software, and this disturbs me because it puts it most at the mercy of an organization whose agenda requires the ultimate destruction of all alternatives -- including all of the BSDs. I work with FreeBSD a fair amount of the time because it has features that I often need. (When size or simplicity is an issue, I use NetBSD or OpenBSD, because they remain closer to the KISS philosophy that was prevalent at CSRG. Also, I can squash their kernels and userlands into a smaller space, which is helpful for some of the embedded applications I do.) I monitor these lists because I need to keep informed about features, security advisories, etc. I participate in the conversations here because I can sometimes be helpful to fellow users and administrators and often learn things. The pissing contests I endure on the lists are their biggest drawback. I'd like to influence the future direction and philosophy of FreeBSD, but even simple and seemingly obvious suggestions in these areas seem to be met with strong resistance. The "leaders" are so territorial and resistant to outside suggestions that they'll reject ideas that come from outside the core group -- and, in particular, from me because I've been labeled as "dangerous." So, my best success has come when I've been able to get one of those leaders to say, "That's a great idea; glad I thought of it!" Unfortunately, the kinds of ideas that can be introduced via this technique are limited. The absolute WORST way to bring up an idea, I've found, is on the mailing lists -- which is a shame because they're the community's primary avenues of communication. I'd like to be able to make suggestions directly rather than being forced to adopt "stealth" techniques, but it doesn't seem possible with the current social climate or leadership. The egos are too strong and the combative nature of some of the key players prevents it. I hold out a faint hope that there could be open, honest, relaxed, and less ego-laden discussion, but sure don't see it on the horizon anytime soon, at least for FreeBSD. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.7.2.20010119212205.04417840>