Re: FreeBSD's problems as seen by the BSDForen.de community

On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 04:17:56PM +0100, Timo Schoeler wrote:
> Thus Erik Trulsson <ertr1013_at_student.uu.se> spake on Fri, 11 Jan 2008
> 16:00:57 +0100:
> 
> > 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.
> 
> I don't have priorities on what he's working on, but the
> project/community has.

The project/community is an abstract entity that does not have any
opinions or priorities of its own.  Indviduals within the project/community
have priorities - often different priorities.

> And as he's part of this community -- he chose
> being part of it -- he should do what is best for the community. Not
> what is 2nd or 3rd best. Period.

Sure - as long as I get to decide what is best for the community. :-)

Otherwise I will just note that I am not a great fan of communism.


> 
> > > 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.
> 
> There's no *me* or *I*, there's a project/community. Should I spell
> it? :)

It wouldn't help to spell it out - it would still be just as wrong.

> 
> > > > In almost all cases it does
> > > > not.  If they were not working on that "lower priority" code, they
> > > > would not be working on your "more important" code anyway, unless
> > > > they already wanted to do that.
> > > 
> > > That's just a lack of responsibility, morals, and enthusiasm. So,
> > > why code at all?
> > > 
> > > > Kris
> > > 
> > > Timo

-- 
<Insert your favourite quote here.>
Erik Trulsson
ertr1013_at_student.uu.se