OpenBSD exists for the developers? [Was: Re: Version 4.0 release]

2006-10-10 Thread chefren

On 10/10/06 4:46 AM, Kian Mohageri wrote:

On 10/9/06, Lars Hansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


I guess you didn't understand; OpenBSD does not exist for you or me, it
exists for the developers.




This is a truth everybody should have to read before submitting their
complaint/feature request/rant/whatever.


It's definitely not as simple as that, probably about a dynamic half 
of the truth.


A large part of the developers give away their work and solve problems 
of other people just because they like to do so. I presume they 
believe enough of the receivers will do something in return 
(donations, or even code) to help the whole project.


This all is pure economics, although there are far less developers 
than users, the whole project is in a dynamic balance. Sometimes 
Theo screams for money, sometimes a user screams for code. Both seem 
disturbing to others but there is essentially nothing wrong with both 
of them, they are fully allowed to do so because of the free speech on 
this list.


+++chefren


p.s. Really nothing wrong with getting the E450 in the spotlight so 
more people know of a lack of code and really nothing wrong with 
knowing the project has a lack of money.




Re: OpenBSD exists for the developers? [Was: Re: Version 4.0 release]

2006-10-10 Thread Diana Eichert
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, chefren wrote:
SNIP
 +++chefren


 p.s. Really nothing wrong with getting the E450 in the spotlight so
 more people know of a lack of code and really nothing wrong with
 knowing the project has a lack of money.

An e440, what a room heater.  If a developer feels like getting SMP
running on sun h/w that's cool, but an enduser complaining about it, geez.
I'm pretty sure the last of our e450s went out to the crusher pasture
several years ago.



Re: OpenBSD exists for the developers? [Was: Re: Version 4.0 release]

2006-10-10 Thread Kian Mohageri
On 10/10/06, chefren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



 On 10/10/06 4:46 AM, Kian Mohageri wrote:
  On 10/9/06, Lars Hansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  I guess you didn't understand; OpenBSD does not exist for you or me, it
  exists for the developers.
 
 
 
  This is a truth everybody should have to read before submitting their
  complaint/feature request/rant/whatever.

 It's definitely not as simple as that, probably about a dynamic half
 of the truth.

 A large part of the developers give away their work and solve problems
 of other people just because they like to do so. I presume they
 believe enough of the receivers will do something in return
 (donations, or even code) to help the whole project.



Yes, the developers do to give away their creations to the public free of
charge, but as far as I'm concerned that does not change who the project is
actually *for*.  The public benefits from the generosity and intelligence of
the developers (and people who contribute in other ways to the project).
But ultimately the project was never under anyones control except the
leaders -- it belongs to them, and exists for them.  They are in no way
required to do what they do;   there is no REAL obligation to the public.

I agree with you, though, that there is a balance in the community despite
who the project is originally for -- and that balance works well.  In fact,
most people in here probably don't actually think that OpenBSD owes them
something (hopefully...)...but it can be hard to tell from some of the
complaints.

-Kian



Re: OpenBSD exists for the developers? [Was: Re: Version 4.0 release]

2006-10-10 Thread Joe

Diana Eichert wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, chefren wrote:
SNIP

+++chefren


p.s. Really nothing wrong with getting the E450 in the spotlight so
more people know of a lack of code and really nothing wrong with
knowing the project has a lack of money.


An e440, what a room heater.  If a developer feels like getting SMP
running on sun h/w that's cool, but an enduser complaining about it, geez.
I'm pretty sure the last of our e450s went out to the crusher pasture
several years ago.


I understand this guy's grief, but at the same time, I'm happy to see 
hardware development focused on more current hardware.


Perhaps the best thing a user can do is make the hardware available and 
keep buying CD's to support the project.