DragonFly kernel List (threaded) for 2003-11
Re: Am I way off base here?
Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> At 5:22 PM -0500 11/25/03, Skip Ford wrote:
> >The behaviour of the FreeBSD folks is par for the course.
> >Whenever someone proposes an idea that conflicts with the
> >path they've already taken, they pout. The better the
> >idea and the more foolish it makes their chosen path look,
> >the higher they raise their bottom lip.
> I guess I'll say that I resent that comment.
You certainly have that right. I'm not a part of either FreeBSD
or DragonFly, though I use both and am learning, but that's the
impression I have.
> I have my
> own good ideas which I'd like to see implemented which
> would address the performance issues.
If my opinion above is correct, you'll be given a really hard
time if you try to undo dynamic root regardless of the validity of
your argument. If you're not, I'm wrong.
The same applies to any code committed as a result of a policy
> >And now there's apparently a new rule, whenever someone
> >mentions DragonFly they cover their ears and scream loudly
> >to make sure they can't hear it.
> Well, let's be real here. The reason DragonFly exists is
> that there were a few key FreeBSD developers who were
> constantly annoyed with Matt. Thus, this is not "new",
> and it also does not mean that *all* FreeBSD developers
> are cold to ideas from Matt. It just means some people
> do not get along.
> It should also be noted that Matt nearly got voted to a
> position on FreeBSD's core team, so it is pretty
> obnoxiously unfair to paint all FreeBSD developers
> with any particular coat of paint.
Only Wes Peters has stepped forward to say that DragonFly ideas
are welcome on the FreeBSD lists. Everyone else either says to
take it elsewhere or says nothing in response to those posts which
is just as bad.