Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.misc:2710 comp.os.linux.misc:19722 Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc,comp.os.linux.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!MathWorks.Com!news.kei.com!travelers.mail.cornell.edu!cornell!mdw From: mdw@cs.cornell.edu (Matt Welsh) Subject: Re: I hope this won't ignite a major flame war, but I've got to know! Message-ID: <1994Jul20.040243.5860@cs.cornell.edu> Organization: Cornell CS Robotics and Vision Laboratory, Ithaca, NY 14850 References: <30fhpn$968@pdq.coe.montana.edu> <1994Jul19.143013.28119@cs.cornell.edu> <30h8kt$fcv@pdq.coe.montana.edu> Date: Wed, 20 Jul 1994 04:02:43 GMT Lines: 51 In article <30h8kt$fcv@pdq.coe.montana.edu> nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu (Nate Williams) writes: >For historical reasons. 386BSD had all of the 'integration' done by >*one* person, and his decision weren't always met with approval. (As >are some of the changes Linus makes, but he's a much easier guy to get >along with than the 386BSD person) This is fair enough, yet I sense a difference between the attitudes undertaken for Linux and FreeBSD. First of all, the FreeBSD Core Team not only manages the kernel sources, but the entire tree of applications as well. From what I understand, this runs the gamut from basic utilities to libraries to larger applications. Am I correct in this observation? If so, then there is an extreme difference between Linux and FreeBSD. When people say that "Linux development is open", what they really mean, in a more general sense, is that "Everyone can contribute to Linux, easily." By "easily" I mean that someone can compile an application, write a piece of code or documentation, whatever, and upload it to the archive sites. It is then officially "part of the Linux system". There's no red tape to go through. Simply drop your contribution into /pub/Linux/Incoming on sunsite, post an announcement, and that's that. You don't have to "go through" some team in order to make your contribution---whatever it may be---available. In many cases, your software is included in distributions such as Slackware, without even having to ask for this explicitly. Yes, Linux has coordinators for various projects. I'm not arguing against coordination and teamwork. However, within the FreeBSD team, it sounds like you claim sole responsibility for the _entire_ system. There's a point at which over-coordination is damaging to progress. Can J. Random User really _directly_ contribute to the project? How much red tape does it require, if so? How encouraging is it for J. Random User to contribute, when an all-powerful Core Team looms in the shadows? (Please note the hint of sarcasm in the above statements.) A quick scan of the comp.os.386bsd.* newsgroups (which are now defunct, for all I know) doesn't yield dozens of announcements of new software or patches as the Linux newsgroups do. The few postings I see on c.o.3.a seem to come from Core Team members. The point is that the Linux development team is based on user contributions. Various individuals or small groups direct effort where coordination is needed. For example, the Debian Linux Association will coordinate the Debian distribution---however, anyone can contribute a package to be included in the system with very little administrivia involved. There's not much difference between the _avowed_ philosophies of Linux and FreeBSD, but for some reason they work differently. Why? E-mail me directly, if appropriate. M. Welsh