Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.bsd:12938 comp.os.386bsd.misc:1500 Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.386bsd.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!menudo.uh.edu!nuchat!frobozz!kevin From: kevin@frobozz.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown) Subject: Re: [RFD] Election of a new Moderator References: <jmonroyCG7w9q.6s2@netcom.com> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1993 21:40:05 GMT Organization: Frobozzco International Message-ID: <CGCK6u.1DD@frobozz.sccsi.com> Lines: 35 I responded to this in a lot more detail via email, but I thought I would make a few brief points before retreating. :-) Firstly, I believe Mr. Monroy's primary beef is with the removal of 386BSD from agate, and that he thus *does* have a beef with the management of agate despite his claim to the contrary. Secondly, since NetBSD is derived from 386BSD, it seems silly to claim that there is some sort of conflict between the two. Ignoring for the moment the problems of source tree integration, a change made to NetBSD that can be applied to 386BSD can easily be regarded as a change to 386BSD as well. And vice-versa. In that sense, development of NetBSD is, by and large, development of 386BSD as well. Thirdly, since public development and release control of NetBSD is performed by a number of people, the Jolitzes no longer need to do release control. Rather, they can just as easily submit any fixes/enhancements they have to the NetBSD group as they could incorporate them into 386BSD and come up with a new release of 386BSD. One could easily argue that since incorporation of changes into NetBSD is now being done by the NetBSD group, the work the Jolitzes need to do is significantly reduced. For these reasons, I don't expect any further releases of 386BSD to be made. Of course, I'm just a Linux person who has always had an interest in BSD, so I might not know what I'm talking about. :-) -- Kevin Brown kevin@frobozz.sccsi.com This is your .signature virus: < begin 644 .signature (9V]T8VAA(0K0z end > This is your .signature virus on drugs: <> Any questions?