On Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 02:49:14PM -0500, Dennis wrote:
> You use the term "our developers" as if you are some sort of closed cult.
They have something in common, and it's not a cult. It's called being
an "open source developer".
> I have NEVER complained about Intel not releasing full information on
> their boards.That whining has come exclusively from hackers that didnt feel
> like doing the work. I complained about FreeBSD having a "maintainer" for a
> very important driver who didnt do any maintaining. I fixed the persistent
> PHY problem in an afternoon with info from the available linux driver
> supplied by intel. You dont need to get intel to change its policy to
> support the board. Its just an excuse to not do it. There are plenty of
> resources available.
Not in terms of time. BSD developers prefer to spend their time on
opensource code that's done the right way. Hence the quality of FreeBSD.
I'm sure you knew that already, since you're supporting this in ETInc's
products.
> If the if_wx driver sucks, why not fix it rather than trying to coerce a
> mega-companies with a deep political structure to change is policies? But
> if youre not going to maintain it, dont do it at all. You cant stick it to
> users by deciding later that you dont want to support it anymore.
You can't "fix" a device driver "correctly" when you don't have the
right docs.
> I complained for days and then fixed the fxp driver in about 4 hours. Maybe
> its time to do work and complain less.
Uh bro, if you have patches, submit them! That's what opensource is all
about... of course you knew that too. :)
--
wca
PGP signature
