-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Erik Trulsson wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 02:51:28PM +0100, Timo Schoeler wrote: >> Thus Kris Kennaway <kris_at_FreeBSD.org> spake on Fri, 11 Jan 2008 >> 14:12:25 +0100: >> >>> Timo Schoeler wrote: >>> >>>>> It will even go into the CVS tree (though probably not into >>>>> GENERIC) if the source is clean, style(9)-compliant and >>>>> well maintained. >>>> It should do with *one* exception: Every other, more >>>> important problem (e.g. getting ZFS to v9) is *solved*. If >>>> this is the case, import the USB christmas tree device driver >>>> and introduce dev.xmastree.lamps.blink as sysctl, absolutely >>>> no problem. >>>> >>>>> But even if it doesn't go into the tree, that's not a big >>>>> deal. For example, for several years I maintained some >>>>> patches that improved syscons (kern/15436). They didn't go >>>>> into CVS, but they worked fine for me and a few others. >>>> But I bet you would be fine with it in the tree as well as >>>> some others, if not all others? If so, why didn't it get into >>>> the tree? Maybe because some lower-priority USB christmas >>>> device driver was imported instead? >>>> >>>> This is the crucial point I wanted to show: *Priorities*. >>> You are making the incorrect assumption that one developer >>> working on e.g. your /dev/uxmas in any way effects the >>> development of other "more important" parts of the tree. >> No, I didn't. I said that the work is done ineffectively as he's >> doing underprioritized stuff. Working on higher prioritized stuff >> would be more efficient, and would help the project even more. > > But he is probably working on high priority stuff. High priority > according to *his* priorities that is, not your priorities. And a different reward system would encourage a more socially responible approach on both sides. > > > >> Given the assumption that the developer is able to do both, the >> Xmas tree as well as importing ZFS v9 into the tree. >> >> (I don't see the point that when somebody is really *capable* of >> doing both things, why should (s)he do the 'lower priority' >> thing. If you are at the olympic stadium and you're the best >> sprinter, you wouldn't join the marathon...!) > > Because he thinks the 'lower priority' thing is more fun, and > doesn't care at all about the stuff that you happen to think should > be high priority. The requirement that the work must be "fun" is a fatal flaw with FOSS once the projects actually start getting used by real people to do real work... like I said else where do you really want the DoD run by people who think war is "fun". - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems, Java Developer Tools. http://www.flosoft-systems.com Developer, not business, friendly. "Free software != Free beer" Blog: http://www.flosoft-systems.com/flosoft_systems_community/blogs/aryeh/index.php -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHh4ZOjRvRjGmHRgQRAh//AJ9UHUCxWvSLAPay9/OiyuoB2Wz5jgCghHMV rQ4nOfaisKm/DUxl/Irla3E= =eYGs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----Received on Fri Jan 11 2008 - 14:08:08 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:25 UTC