Subject: Re: NetBSD version naming - suggestion
To: Bill Studenmund <email@example.com>
From: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/23/2003 01:28:00
> While the "shouldn't", that's not realistic. If you want the new cool
> stuff, you have to run -current. If you have a machine which is only
> supported in -current (or use components only in -current), you have to
> use current. We want to have more releases to reduce this pressure, but we
> keep adding things that need shaking out (ELF for 1.5, UBC for 1.6,
> pthreads for 2.0), so we get delayed.
> Yes, that's what we have now. And having something that makes sense the
> first time you encounter it is what I think we should strive for.
about the cool stuff -> get linux
about the arch only in -current -> get to know NetBSD, try hard and
eventually contribute experiences
no, seriously: under no circumstance we should attract too many users
to NetBSD. Why should we? it is the quality (knowledge and readiness
to learn) of our users that makes the NetBSD the best. if we try to
be easy to do that and easy to do that ... i don't want a system like
that. I like the stripped, configurable, powerful, logical system that
doesn't do things for me, instead of me or behind my back. It should
do exactly what i want. Sure it should enable me to restyle it and make
a first-contact-all-automated-multi-media-user-friendly os out of it.
but that should by no means be the default.
That said back to the theme. ===> sure we want people to join the project
since there is no project without users and developers. but i think we
have out niche (hope that the word is right), and it is technical
excellence not user-friendliness.
So back to the original conversation: If the current scheme fulfills
tehnical criteria, there is no need to change it (especially not for
the reason of new users feeling more comfortable with it).
yes i know i went a bit off with this but i had to explain my view
of the background of this discussion and the missed wrong for
changing the scheme.