Am 12/30/11 10:07, schrieb Mark Linimon: > On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 04:04:31PM +0100, O. Hartmann wrote: >> There maybe serious reasons having the Linuxulator, i do not know. But >> if not, why spending rare developer resources on that? > > This is a classical misunderstanding of the FreeBSD development model. > > There is no "staff" standing around waiting for assignments, as with > a commercial company. When committers join the project, they usually > (almost always) already have a long list of things that they want to > work on. And then they go work on them. > > Neither the core team, nor the FreeBSD Foundation, "direct" the project > and its course of development. Some of the members of each do post > emails, or stand up in front of conferences, and say "you know, I think > it would be really neat if someone did xyz." Sometimes this leads to > results, sometimes not. > > As for the companies that have their own FreeBSD-derived products, > often their goals are tightly focused, e.g. "improve the number of > packets we can pass" or "support our specialized hardware". Some, > but not all, of the resultant work makes it back into FreeBSD. We > get to say "it would be really neat if ..."; and, in addition, point > to possible future minimization of merging and duplication of effort > as a way to save costs long-term. > > But with these exceptions, development is primarily driven from the > bottom-up (individual committers find something they are interested in > working on, and then go work on it), and not the top-down as in "real" > companies. This is the way the overwhelming majority (90+%?) of the > work on FreeBSD gets done. > > So, there's no one "assigned" the tasks of closing PRs, nor working on > coordinating code with the other BSDs, nor working on the Linuxolator, > nor even supporting high-performance computing. > > It's a cooperative anarchy, not a hierarchy. > > mcl
By no maen is this what I said or intended to say. oliver
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
