Mr. Leitl,
I don't quite understand your problem here.
You claim that the m0n0 interface has better usability, and is superior in
look, however, you do not support these claims with any useful examples that
would allow the pfSense team to improve their interface.

pfSense is not m0n0; it has more features, packages, and the like, and
therefore needs a different interface to accomodate these differences.
I've done web design before, and as far as I can see, I cannot think of a
way to improve the pfSense interface. Perhaps your browser sucks and cannot
display the menus properly? (I've had that problem before)

Your statement that your claims are a "bug report" is a lie. Any useful bug
report contains information that would be helpful to the developers; yours
contains only incendiary comments.

Learn how to code and port the m0n0 interface over to pfSense, or better
yet, learn how to be respectful over the internet. The people who develop
pfSense have other things to do than develop pfSense. We'd all be S.O.L. if
it weren't for them. (Care to learn OpenBSD and write your own pf filter
rules at console? Neither do I.)

Good day sir
A.C. R.

Reply via email to