FreeBSD has serious problems with focus, longevity, and lifecycle

[Igor Mozolevsky]

On 17 January 2012 14:20, Ivan Voras <ivoras at freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 17 January 2012 14:49, Igor Mozolevsky <igor at hybrid-lab.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 17 January 2012 13:44, Ivan Voras <ivoras at freebsd.org> wrote:
>>> On 17/01/2012 07:32, Atom Smasher wrote:
>>>>
>>>> what percentage of linux devs are on salary to develop linux?
>>>
>>> Apparently, 3/4: http://apcmag.com/linux-now-75-corporate.htm
>>
>> Actually, you're misrepresenting the facts: according to the headline,
>> 75% of the code came from paid developers, *not* 75% of developers are
>> paid... See the difference?..
>
> Yes, you're correct.

Actually, I don't think it's cash that's the problem. I think it is
more to do with the lack of common goal: the way that releases are
perceived, at least by me, are that a bunch of people "play" in
current then at some point someone decides to take a "cut" of the
current branch and call it a release then work toward making that
"release" passable as stable. To illustrate that, I cannot find
anywhere on the .org website what core@ see the desirable features of
10.0 to be, or what the committers are working toward. It seems that
the "bazaar" model of development is at its worst here: everyone is
doing their own thing and at some point someone decides to call it a
day and make a release, nobody cares for what they have already done,
but only what they want to do in the future, non-committer patches go
ignored (no, I don't have a reference) which discourages end-user
contribution... I'm very happy to be shown wrong here, btw!..


--
Igor M. :-)