From owner-freebsd-stable  Wed Mar 22  4:54:10 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mail.ddg.com (eunuch.ddg.com [216.30.58.66])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D3A537BAE9
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Wed, 22 Mar 2000 04:54:05 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from rkw@dataplex.net)
Received: from nomad.dataplex.net (24.28.73.209) by mail.ddg.com with SMTP
 (Eudora Internet Mail Server 2.1); Wed, 22 Mar 2000 06:54:01 -0600
From: Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net>
To: thomas.uhrfelt@plymovent.se
Subject: Re: SV: Voxware is toast. Get used to it. (Re: Suggestions for impro
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 06:24:14 -0600
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.29]
Content-Type: text/plain
Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
References: <01BF93FE.6BFBBEE0.thomas.uhrfelt@plymovent.se>
In-Reply-To: <01BF93FE.6BFBBEE0.thomas.uhrfelt@plymovent.se>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <00032206535801.01108@nomad.dataplex.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Wed, 22 Mar 2000, Thomas Uhrfelt wrote:
> > "-RELEASE" is not a state. It is a point in time.
> > The other terms refer to the continuum between releases.
> >
> > I still think that "current" is misleading to newbies and should be 
> called
> > "development".
> 
> I have no religious views at all on the subject, so either way is fine by 
> me. The reason why it's called CURRENT I belive is due to the fact thats 
> where the focal point on the project is. New things gets adopted and 
> basically - that's where FreeBSD is, not neccessarily the users.

Yes, I understand the basis. FreeBSD was viewed as a DEVELOPMENT project
and everything was referenced in that context

> > > It is possible from this
> > > mailing list launch suggestion for the development team?
> >
> > I don't think so. It seems that "its their sand box" and they really 
> > don't care how unfriendly their practices are to mere "users"
> 
> Your statement is highly unfair, I have been swimming in this community 
> pond for the last 18 months, and I never experienced the core as elitist or 
> anything near that.

Only 18 months! I've got FreeBSD systems still up that haven't been rebooted in
that period. Unfortunately, Moore's Law may be the uptime killer :-)

Before you pass judgment, you should read some of the
"You F&*(&king idiot, RTFM!" replies that used to go out in response to
questions from new, would be, users.

> Not to mention that the FreeBSD support model is 
> unparalleled. I get better support from the FreeBSD community that I do 
> from $10K support contracts.

I don't dispute this at all. It IS one of the real selling points.

However, IMHO, FreeBSD has a "reputation" for being (to be polite) "elitist".
If the project ever wants to break out of the "developer's sandbox", it MUST
attract "mere users".

I think that many of the developers ignore the "tax" that they pay in answering
the same support questions over and over. The developers are so set in their
ways that they fail to accept the fact that "cosmetic" changes can have real
benefit. There is a pervasive "if it's not code, it's worthless" attitude. They
prefer to make others suffer so they can continue in their comfortable ruts.
That's why I call it a "developer's sandbox".


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message