> > I just know that core has either struck it down or been Silent. On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 05:32:26PM -0600, Mark Linimon wrote: > The latter is an entirely different case from the former, and you've been > claiming core has done the former. This, and the above, tell me that > you're not interested in checking your facts before making an accusation. > (And, as well, that you do not even understand the role the core plays > in the project. Hint: it is not primarily technical in nature.)
I agree with most of what you said here. This was known and understood. Agreement on direction is what I was expecting, er, dreaming about. Not technical issues. Sorry if that surprises you. But I have to take objection to this: > As a final observation, FreeBSD is rarely advanced by postings of the > form 'FreeBSD must do XYZ'. This is primarily because volunteers work on > whatever they feel interested in doing with their free time, rather than > the priorities anyone else sets for them. First, this is obvious and true for all open source projects. But no, FreeBSD _never_ advances because someone writes code that does something well. FreeBSD _only_ advances when the core developers agree that this thing is worthy of their interest. And I'm not even saying this is a bad thing. It just means that writing code without buy-in from the core developers is GUARANTEED to be a waste of time. -- Jo Rhett senior geek SVcolo : Silicon Valley Colocation _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
