by homeworld.cygnus.com with SMTP; 25 Nov 1998 11:57:15 -0000
	by beer.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id EAA29637;
	Wed, 25 Nov 1998 04:57:07 -0700 (MST)
Message-Id: <199811251157.EAA29637@beer.org>
To: Alicia da Conceicao <alicia@internetpaper.com>
Cc: netbsd-advocacy@netbsd.org
Subject: Re: Merging Net/Free/Open-BSD together against Linux 
From: Herb Peyerl <hpeyerl@beer.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <29634.911995025.1@lager>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 04:57:06 -0700

[note: I'm confused by what exactly this has to do with the i386 port of
NetBSD.  Perhaps the author doesn't understand that NetBSD is not just 
an i386 based operating system and that we support on the order of 20 
more platforms.  Not to mention that this is not technical discussion.
So I'm putting it here; in as much as it's marginally relevant to this
list.  (hp)]

Alicia da Conceicao <alicia@internetpaper.com>  wrote:
 > I've just recently returned from Comdex in Las Vegas.  While I was there,
 > I conducted a number of interviews, with a number of organizations and
 > individuals for Internet Paper.  Based on the responses I have received,
 > as well as information from other sources including the web, mailing
 > lists, news sources, and other publications, it would appear that Linux
 > (which is already the most popular ix86 Unix OS) is gaining in some of
 > its growth at the expensive of BSD based Unixes, including NetBSD.  More
 > alarming, this trend appears to be predominate among new Unix adoptees.

I don't think that is particularly "alarming" myself... It seems perfectly
natural that people should try other products... For the most part, I
know many people who have tried NetBSD, FreeBSD, and Linux and have 
come back to NetBSD.  I'm sure there are cases where people have tried 
all three and chosen one of the others. I think this is a perfectly
acceptable outcome... As long as they don't try all three and choose
W98... We know that the vast majority of the populace will choose 
mediocrity when presented with all the choices.  This is true in general.

 > development, I find this trend alarming.  It is true that NetBSD does
 > benefit from the talent pools from other Unix operating systems,
 > including Linux, FreeBSD, and others, especially through its binary
 > emulation of applications and porting of non NetBSD based source code.
 > However, it has become clear that this approach is not enough to prevent
 > NetBSD's gradual erosion.  I'm sure may of us NetBSD supporters envy
 > the increasing user base and increasing "native" software base that
 > Linux is receiving.

I'm not sure how you've been able to conclude that it's suddenly become
clear that this will not prevent NetBSD's gradual erosion? Please provide
your sources.  I would agree that many NetBSD supporters envy the
increasing user base and increasing "native" software base that Linux
is receiving... However, I'm also sure that many NetBSD supporters do
_not_ envy those things and in fact, are quite grateful that we do not 
have millions of rabid hordes of junior OS-hackers flooding us with 
incorrect patches and then stirring up trouble when they don't get 
included.   In reality, I know, from looking at the increase in signups
on the mailing lists, as well as a few other indicators, that the NetBSD
user base is in fact increasing.  How is it eroding?

 > Part of the problem with NetBSD is that it is one of several "forks" or
 > splits from BSD, which also include FreeBSD, OpenBSD, BSDI, etc.  This
 > splitting up of BSD into the different forks has divided up the talent
 > pool of BSD developers, benefiting non-forked operating system like
 > Linux.

The last time I looked, which was quite recent mind you, I found that 
there were quite a large number of Linux distributions all with different
goals and different contents.  In fact, I found that there were more
"Linux operating systems" than there are currently BSD operating systems.
How can you claim that Linux is a non-forked operating system? How similar
is Redhat with Debian?  How similar is the Amiga version of "Linux" to
the Sparc version of "Linux"?  How 'bout the Alpha version?  To my knowledge,
they don't even share the same source repository... What exactly _is_ 
"Linux"?  Linux is to Unix as Hamburgers are to the food industry.  You
can buy hamburgers from any of a thousand different vendors and they're 
all different...

 > NetBSD, FreeBSD, and OpenBSD are all open source, and each of them have
 > their own advantages over the other.  Now is the time that people put
 > their egos aside and perhaps at least talk about merging some components
 > of these BSD operating systems, including kernels, drivers, etc., taking
 > the best features from each.  Only then can we establish a BSD based OS
 as the real non-Linux Unix alternative; something that Sun Solaris, SCO,
 > OSF, etc. are also trying to do.

We have been told repeatedly, over the years, that "now is the time that
people should put their egos aside and perhaps at least talk about 
merging some components."  In fact, at one point, we did "talk" about
merging some components... At the time, we couldn't even agree on how to
go about merging... The problem was not _ego_ however; it was a result of
widely different goals that were not mutually compatible; and in the end,
it was decided that we were all best off the way we are.

 > I would be most interested in hearing from other NetBSD users about the
 > idea of possible merging the BSD OS forks back together, especially from
 > those of you who are actively involved in NetBSD OS development.

>From my own perspective; there's a lot of water under the bridge. Some
of it is moving and some of it is just swirling around... When standing
on the outside, it must seem quite obvious that the one true answer is
to merge all of the *BSD's and create one true BSD to go forth and 
conquer the world... However, from the inside, it is not so plain and
in fact, becomes a non-goal due to the wildly conflicting goals and 
directions that we've all taken.  If you propose to merge the goals and
direction and try to corral up all the wild horses, you will kill off
most of the true thoroughbreds and end up with a mish-mash that will
really go stagnant...

It seems we, the various developers and organizers, are quite happy in
our respective places... We don't agree with your assertion that the
only road to nirvana is in squishing diversity.

Just my opinion.