> > I think I do more than enough and don't need to make promises to > > outsiders just to keep this project alive. I bet all the developers > > feel the same way. > > Fair enough. Ignoring my particular case for the moment, I was trying > to generalize the suggestion with the thought that most corporate > sponsers would need at least a rudimentary, "this is why we're spending > the money, and that is how we know when we're done" statement in their > records. Not for you, but for themselves. As far as promises to outsiders > is concerned, I hadn't intended that as any more than, "when <feature>, > which we were planning on doing anyway, is ready, I will promise to > commit it". That they would have committed it anyway is IMO irrelevent.
I know of work in various part of the tree that could do with funding. All of them will make OpenBSD run substantially faster. Features come with those, but speed is the essential benefit. So if anyone is truly interested contact me, and I will get you talking to the right people for specific tasks. The only thing I will do is make sure that noone's time is being wasted. > However I was under the impression that there was > instances of funding in the past (DARPA? [at the risk of stirring > up bad blood]), Interesting you would bring that up. Under the DARPA grant (note the word) they gave us absolutely no rules or restrictions. We did not signed any paperwork regarding the tasks ahead of us (actually, I think I never signed anything at all :). We were funded, which released us from other worries, and then we performed the magic we were planning to do anyways. > That the answer (for Theo at least) is "no" is fine, and I can respect > the reasons. The discussion has given me (and perhaps others) at least > a couple of options for "CD bucket" contributions, and thanks for taking > the time to clarify things. I'll start with ammending my outstanding CD > order accordingly. Kind of scary how the simplest approaches are... the simplest.
