Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 00:30:25 GMT From: jak@cetlink.net (John Kelly) To: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Donations. Message-ID: <3504f132.43945382@mail.cetlink.net> In-Reply-To: <199803050007.RAA13519@mt.sri.com> References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980304123946.19978E-100000@coyote.prepaid.atlas.com> <3500e925.41883882@mail.cetlink.net> <199803050007.RAA13519@mt.sri.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 4 Mar 1998 17:07:45 -0700, Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> wrote: >> >I would agree, and in any case, an entity with a large chunck of money >> >and a specific feature in mind would be better off funding the effort >> >directly. >> >> That causes fragmentation and duplication of efforts. Collective >> unity is better. > >Back that up with facts, or even explanations, please? If you have 50 contractors all working and paid independently, with little or no knowledge of what the others are doing, duplication and wasted effort is inevitable. On the other hand, a funded FreeBSD could be a clearinghouse for better organization. >People have (and will continue) the ability and desire to do *anything* >they want, including doing the same project that someone else is doing. >Commercial and/or volunteer, that's not going to change. > >Your straw-man argument has no merit. Sorry, can't agree with you there. -- Browser war over, Mozilla now free. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3504f132.43945382>