Hi, On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 10:22:35AM +0000, David Holland wrote: > Because of these trends, I've been thinking for a while now that maybe > it's getting to be time to fork. That would allow having one project > that intends to stay current, with all the attendant requirements, > which probably mostly doesn't make sense on vintage hardware; and > another project that explicitly abandons most or all of that and > instead concentrates on being the best possible traditional multiuser > or workstation Unix, which does make sense on vintage hardware that > was designed for (or could be adapted to) those roles, and which also > makes sense on newer hardware to the extent it's consistent with the > traditional role.
I would argue that this has happened already - FreeBSD and NetBSD are the results... at least from the outside, this is how it looks like, with FreeBSD focusing on few platforms but modernizing itself quite a bit (kernel preempting, zfs, ...) and NetBSD focusing on "it runs everywhere". I'm not sure the BSD worlds needs yet another fork. Now, speaking as application developer: I'd hate to see yet another BSD fork that I have to test OpenVPN on regularily, to see whether "we" or "they" broke something and system-specific parts need to be adjusted... (right now, we build and test on FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD, and various versions of those - sufficiently subtly different that there has to be system-specific code for ifconfig/route handling...) gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! //www.muc.de/~gert/ Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de fax: +49-89-35655025 g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de