Re: Removing PF

[Maxime Villard <max%m00nbsd.net@localhost>]

Le 30/03/2019 à 08:51, Michael van Elst a écrit :
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 08:17:44AM +0100, Maxime Villard wrote:
> > Le 30/03/2019 à 08:07, Michael van Elst a écrit :
> > > max%m00nbsd.net@localhost (Maxime Villard) writes:
> > >
> > > > If the effort hadn't been split on three firewalls in the last 10 years, but
> > > > rather had been focused on only one, don't you think NPF would now be
> > > > featureful?
> > >
> > > Now if the effort of the world hadn't been split among Windows, MacOS
> > > and Linux, but rather had been focused on only NetBSD, don't you think
> > > NetBSD would now be featureful ?
> >
> > Yes, if the effort had been on one firewall instead of three, the one
> > chosen would be more functional. Period. You have absolutely no point,
> > do you?
>
> You just don't understand the point. Period. Hey, I said Period, it must
> be true.
>
> Do you believe people would give up their efforts on Windows, or
> MacOS or Linux to focus on NetBSD ?
>
> Ah, silly me, too abstract. Do you really believe the maintainers
> of ipf and npf would give up their projects to work on pf ?

Ah because there are maintainers of ipf? There is _no_ maintainer of ipf
whatsoever. Do you understand, or not? Give me a list of people who maintain
ipf. Just like, give me a list of people who maintain pf in NetBSD.

> The point is that you only alienate people that are not following
> your decision. Period. Hah, again.

Decision? I haven't taken any decision, I've made a clear and logical proposal
to drop PF, that I am sending to a public mailing list for further discussion.

You, on the other side, have put forward zero clear argument, and have just
thrown random, inaccurate and irrelevant comparisons, that leave my proposal
completely unchallenged.