Slightly late in responding to this, but hey: Michael Grigoni wrote:
>> William Chivers wrote: > Thank you Theo and your team of developers for OpenBSD. > > Some people responding to the "European Orders" thread seem to have lost sight of what OpenBSD is and who develops it. I am a bit of a newbie here (although I have been using computers in my career since 1972)... < I also add my thanks to the discussion. I do have a fundamental question to pose however. It seems that opensource culture for large projects is driven by featurism and the need to make massive changes incorporated into frequent releases. I come from a background of very long-term stability requirements for APIs and ABIs, performance figures on hardware over long life-cycles and stringent documentation. I do embedded work and expect to maintain a system for decades without massive overhaul. << First, let me add my thanks to Theo and the guys for the continued existence of OpenBSD. You and your work *are* appreciated. Second, you mentioned embedded work, which is my main work area. Yes, embedded stuff needs to be stable long-term - but the Internet isn't: threats change, and OpenBSD evolves. A classic solution to that (which I've used) is to simply accept that the legacy embedded stuff should not be directly connected to the Internet, and to use a current (or at least regularly maintained) OpenBSD machine as a gateway. Or, to put it another way: use the right tools for the job. Steve -- http://www.fivetrees.com
