On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 08:06:52AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote: > > Absolutely. Especially when you compare it to MacPorts and consider the > disparity in numbers of users between MacOS and FreeBSD. Given that the > ports is maintained by a bunch of volunteers basically in their spare > time, the fact that it is consistently of good quality and that the > popular packages are generally updated to the latest available versions > within a couple of weeks -- frequently within a few hours -- > it's a pretty astonishing accomplishment.
I don't mean to belittle anyone's accomplishments, of course, but I don't find it astonishing at all. FreeBSD's development model is one that encourages people to develop what they use, and to use what they develop, and it doesn't exclude people for rules of arbitrary hiring practices. When your software is developed and/or maintained by way of a more meritocratic system in which people are "eating their own dog food" and the developers/maintainers are self-selected in large part because of their *interest* in what they develop or maintain, it would be surprising to me if something like FreeBSD *didn't* end up doing better than something like MacOS X, which is developed and maintained under an autocratic model wherein many of the developers and maintainers were assigned to their respective projects (regardless of interest) after being hired due to their resume bullet points (regardless of actual ability). That's just my perspective. I suppose yours may differ. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
pgpw78sxaaqIk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
