Hi, I’m sorry that it came off that way. Did you read the whole article? No that you should have, but it addresses most of the points that you mention
I understand that OpenBSD owes me nothing (and vice versa) and I was just trying to help. The decision to merge that information is not mine to do, however, I honestly thought it could help people looking for a more thorough comparison between Linux and the BSDs. I’ve been using free software and contributing to it for a long time, in different projects, you can google it. I have no link to any institution or software/political group. You seem to be about certain that I have some sort of agenda, why? I’m curious. Anyway, I honestly was just trying to help. Writing the patch took me 5 minutes so just forget about it. I don’t want to create a bad mood on a place I just arrived at. Carlos > On 28 Jun 2015, at 23:03, [email protected] wrote: > >> I’ve recently discovered OpenBSD after using Linux for more than 15 years. > > Long time, no see? And you blogged and achieved your goal of... making > yourself expressed, critically on your own controlled web space. > >> I wrote >> a blog article with my impressions and some other users suggested me to >> patch >> faq9.html to help other users migrating. > > Without reading much of the documentation to gain reasonable production > usage, you're trying to mend the OpenBSD site to say it is lacking > something that you thought worth having according to your current > limited to Linux experience. > > Never occurred to you it may be intentional? > >> This patch is regarding the fact that there are no binary updates, which is >> a given thing >> in most Linux distributions, and some tips on how to keep the system >> updated. > > And you consider this a service to other Linux long time users? Or a > way to try push some notion of yours - criticise and try to lobby for > some other entity's interests. > >> Since English is not my first language, before merging the patch, please >> make sure the >> wording is proper. > > The pushing of binary patches notion is not appropriate. > > For a project that provides binary base OS and binary packages for ports > on multiple architectures, and signed distribution of base and > packages, before anyone else adopted these impressive achievements, you > think in your own universe (and your advisor's) this group is resource > constrained and incapable of providing binary patches to current and > stable? > > Read the docs, don't be lazy and overly assuming. You're polluting the > Internet with incorrect information which is a disservice to both > newcomers from Linux and to the OpenBSD community. > >> If you think the issue may be interesting to elaborate on, I could write a >> guide of improve >> on stable.html to help newcomers adapt to this method of keeping up to date. >> > > You're actually trying to scare people off, because you can't handle > the lean and effective process of managing OpenBSD, justifying > this with the unconfirmed fact you were "advised" by somebody. > > Realistically, you could have consulted off list before trying this > stunt. >
