Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!news.netspace.net.au!serval.net.wsu.edu!netnews.nwnet.net!oracle.pnl.gov!osi-east2.es.net!lll-winken.llnl.gov!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!violet.berkeley.edu!jkh From: jkh@violet.berkeley.edu (Jordan K. Hubbard) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc Subject: Re: OpenBSD. PLEASE PLEASE! Date: 20 Jan 1995 18:26:39 GMT Organization: University of California, Berkeley Lines: 56 Message-ID: <3fov8v$rft@agate.berkeley.edu> References: <3fhc5s$atq@nntp.stanford.edu> <3fhpm2$chu@agate.berkeley.edu> <terryl-1901951605120001@tip-mp4-ncs-9.stanford.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: violet.berkeley.edu In article <terryl-1901951605120001@tip-mp4-ncs-9.stanford.edu>, Terry Lee <terryl@cs.stanford.edu> wrote: >With all due respect, Jordan, merging two relatively small groups that >haven't really gotten along in the past is hardly eternal harmony. You >seem to be a bit prone to hyperbole. I may be mildly naive to the inner Perhaps, and if I was overly sarcastic in my first reply then I apologise. I've been a bit stressed-out lately (laughs long and bitterly for about five minutes at the understatement) and prone to use nuclear weapons on people when a gentle poke on the nose would probably do as well. My fault. >workings of BSD, but certainly not 'incredibly' naive. I've taken the >time to follow all the relevant threads as much as possible. Well, let me just say then that the true dynamics of the situation CANNOT be deduced by reading news, primarily because we've kept this kind of dirty laundry under as tight a lid as possible (which is not to say that we've always been successful). To really understand why it's more complex, you'd have to be a member of the core team for either *BSD, or someone very close to it. I know that this sounds like a cop-out, but please just trust me on this one. >You accept them?! Perhaps I seem simplistic because perhaps you still >underestimate these deleterious effects. A free robust OS based on BSD >4.4! I think we are talking about a potential user base of hundreds of >thousands. And you're willing to resign to just a several thousand, or >more,... or less. Simplistic, yes! I'm going to go out on a limb here Then let me be more explicit: No matter how great the potential gains, it's just not going to happen. Acceptance of this is GOOD since it lets us get on with our lives, and it doesn't imply that we're underestimating anything. Believe me! Anyone who's talked to both core teams knows full well at this point that it's NOT POSSIBLE to merge the groups! People in both *BSDs have already said that they'd go away if this happened, and I don't care to see those people leave EITHER group. What good would that do? You want to destroy both groups in pursuit of an ideal? This sort of reminds me of a tale of a certain golden goose and its owners who cut it open to get all the eggs out at once. These are volunteers here, and if they've been led to water, shown how to drink it and still don't want to drink, then pushing their heads under until they drown hardly seems constructive. The teams are already firmly on the path to their own individual destinies, and if this pisses off a few external folks who just don't see why we can't get together, then I'm sorry. I'm tired of people trying to fight this battle when it's obvious to all the generals that it's been lost. I'm not just being pessimistic, either. I've been at the center of these discussions for the last year! I understand the subtleties. Now this is not to say that something amazing might not happen in the future, and if it does I'll certainly be willing to look at it, but for now I would much prefer that both groups be left alone to do their thing as best possible. Regards, Jordan