*BSD News Article 16425


Return to BSD News archive

Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!uchinews!cs.umd.edu!mimsy!jds
From: jds@cs.umd.edu (James da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc
Subject: Re: 386BSD Release: Contributors Only Please...
Message-ID: <67882@mimsy.umd.edu>
Date: 24 May 93 02:48:46 GMT
References: <1te9h8$8fn@agate.berkeley.edu> <67823@mimsy.umd.edu> <1tjqgm$bfc@agate.berkeley.edu>
Sender: news@mimsy.umd.edu
Organization: University of Maryland, Department of Computer Science
Lines: 62

wjolitz@soda.berkeley.edu (William F. Jolitz) writes:
>In article <67823@mimsy.umd.edu> jds@cs.umd.edu (James da Silva) writes:
>>
>>You forgot the biggest one:
>>
>>	UCB Computer Systems Research Group and their contributors
>
>As I've said already, contributors to *THIS RELEASE* ... 

No, the article to which I was responding said this:

 > The following is a preliminary list of all contributors to 386BSD over 
 > the course of it's development and releases (both prior releases and
 > the current release).

So, it was _not_ billed as a list of contributors to *THIS RELEASE*, but
rather a list of _all_ contributors to 386bsd.  I think CSRG certainly
qualifies.

386bsd is an enhanced version of the BSD 4.3 Networking Release 2, and as
such remains largely the work of CSRG and their contributors.

This needs to be said more often in this forum, I think.  Instead you seem
to want to ignore their huge contribution.  That's your business, but don't
get mad when others seek to point it out.

>I think the comment in your signature line is most ironic given the context
>of your "response". Cooperation in public access software is at the heart
>of the issue, and is unfortunately sorely misrepresented.

I am sorry that you feel that someone who disagrees with you is stepping on
your toes.  I feel that healthy debate is at the center of progress.
Perhaps you have forgotten, or didn't notice, that not too long ago I
defended, in this very forum, your choice to go off and do something new
and innovative with 0.2 rather than work on stable patched releases.  So, I
feel I am being consistent with my sig. (naturally :-)

>It shall be "freely modifiable and redistributable", regardless of
>intrigues, "mind games", "ego wars", or "politics". The proof that this is
>so is in your hot little hands. As it will be yet again. And nothing nasty
>can ever take that significant piece of history away, as we move on to the
>future.

I find this to be particularly rich.  Let's not forget who put politics at
the very center of the 386bsd project (ref "The Road Less Traveled" and the
uunet incident).  You reap what you sow, Bill.

>For those who choose to play other games, I'm sorry, perhaps we will be
>able to cooperate again sometime in the future when it is not colored
>so much by the failures of the "old UNIX gods". Sigh.

I see, you wish to tear down the old Unix gods and replace them with your
own cult of personality?  Thanks, but no thanks.  The old gods are a lot
more reasonable.

The bottom line, for me at least, is that your work is great and much
appreciated.  But your politics are awful.

Jaime
............................................................................
: Stand on my shoulders, : jds@cs.umd.edu  :                  James da Silva
: not on my toes.        : uunet!mimsy!jds : Systems Design & Analysis Group