DragonFly kernel List (threaded) for 2003-08
Thanks for taking the time to follow up. I had a feeling that the
timeline/ drastic rewrites your project was doing would prevent it
from being used in my project, and am proud of you for being honest
enough with me to admit that.
I will still use my voice to help advance your cause. I've already
mentioned your project at MUSC's monthly IT meeting, and at the class
I teach. Hopefully, my feeble attempts at advocacy will prevail.
As I said before, I'd love to be a part of this (even if it's just
having a webpage with an end-user's point of view) If there is
anything you, or anyone else on this list, can think of that would be
beneficial, please let me know.
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003 20:19:39 -0700 (PDT), Matthew Dillon
> Adrian, thanks for your interest! We are all fine! It's nice
> to see people excited about DragonFly though it kinda looks like
> what you need is a generic UNIX platform... which DragonFly is,
> but DragonFly is undergoing major development compared to the more
> stable Linux and FreeBSD-4.x platforms and the time frame of the
> work probably means that it isn't (unfortunately) suitable for
> deployment in the work you are doing. My best recommendation for your
> project is that you stick with your current target(1) but keep an eye
> on developments that occur in our arena.
> (1) well, it depends on how many people are involved but generally
> speaking it is a good idea to use what most people are most
> comfortable with. I, and most people on this list, are obviously
> strongly in the UNIX/open-source camp. I believe that it is extremely
> important to have control over all the supporting software used to
> develop any major project because without that control one risks
> depending on things which often become obsolete over time and wind up
> no longer being supported. Software tends to become obsolete fairly
> quickly (within a few years). For example, MS just recently stopped
> supporting NT. Of course, this happens in the open source world too but
> support tends to continue for a far longer period of time because, being
> open source, those people with an interest and an investment in a
> piece of old software can get the code and form a loose association
> to help maintain it long beyond its mainstream lifetime. There are
> open-source programs that are over 20 years old still being supported,
> something you simply cannot find in the commercial world outside of
> a military contract.
> Matthew Dillon