>Hi Ibsen, > >Ibsen S Ripsbusker wrote on Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 05:51:21PM +0000: > >> benevolent dictatorship > >I'm aware you did not call OpenBSD a "benevolent dictatorship", >and i totally see how the term can be used both to shut down >or to incite controversy. > >Yet, i heard the term used several times in the past in relation >to OpenBSD, and merely wanted to mention that i think is misses the >point. Words of the "...cracy" field can be used for systems of >making, adjudicating, and executing laws, laws that limit or expand >what people can and cannot have or do, that directly impact people's >lives. > >Nothing of the kind is at stake here or at the very most, the right >of using the name "OpenBSD". > >OpenBSD cannot make any laws that bind me or cannot tell me what >to do or what not to do, not even in programming, so the question >what kind of a "...cracy" it is is already a moot question to ask. >I'm 100% free to walk away at any time if i'm unhappy with the >colour of the servers in Theo's basement and publish my software >elsewhere. That isn't just a theoretical possibility, it's quite >easy in practice if needed; in fact, mandoc.bsd.lv is already up >and running, and so is bsd.plumbing and other similar places - not >because developers are unhappy with Theo providing free servers in >his basement and fostering a very fertile development community >around them, but simply because having your own site and name with >global visibility is not such a big deal in this day and age. Also, >walking away does not necessarily even uproot you from a development >community - i doubt that people like bapt@ at FreeBSD or wiz@ at >NetBSD or stapelberg@ at Debian or Leah at Void greatly care whether >or not i contribute to OpenBSD this week. > >So, yes, OpenBSD developers form a social group, but not in a way >that (formally or effectively) assigns rights or duties or opportunities >such that describing it as a "...cracy" would make much sense. > >People walking away and doing their work elsewhere under a new name >happens all the time for very diverse reasons and often enough for >good reasons: pf(4), OpenSSH, LibreSSL, heck, OpenBSD itself, and >even NetBSD before that... When it happens, the parent projects >sometimes fade into oblivion - consider pf(4), OpenSSH - and sometimes >live on - consider (so far) the parents of LibreSSL and of OpenBSD >itself as examples. > >See, if you dislike the way Andorran politics is currently being >run, you cannot simply renounce citizenship and set up your own >state in some corner of the country. So in some contexts, asking >about "...cracy" is indeed highly meaningful. For a completely >free software project, no so much. > >Even in a commercial enterprise, the question of governance is more >relevant than in OpenBSD - while in most countries, employees are >formally free to quit, for some employees, that may be a somewhat >theoretical option because some may have few practical chances to >make their living in some other way. And besides, employers *do* >almost invariably tell employees what to work on and how, which >isn't the case here either. > >Yours, > Ingo > >
Nice rant. Now get back to work. :)
