# kleptog@svana.org / 2006-08-05 15:49:33 +0200:
> On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 06:25:35PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > I have heard you make this argument before, and it is just is not true.
> > Even Debian is moving toward a more formal structure as has FreeBSD. You
> > seem stuck in this world where everything is still 1994 and all FOSS
> > software is developed in academia.
>
> Debian moving towards a more formal structure? What I seeing is that
> they're trying to get away from the having one person responsible for
> things to working in groups. What it amounts to is simplifying the
> rules to doing someone elses work. People who don't like it leave and
> you hope you're left with a more efficient group.
>
> The links you provide are mostly about handling releases. To be honest,
> I think PostgreSQL's release handling is fine. But none of those
> projects tackles the issue of making sure certain things get done. If
> someone didn't do the work for getting GCC 4.1 working for Debian, then
> no matter how much of a release goal it was, it wouldn't happen... Actually, the FreeBSD team does gather status
reportsfrom people working on major tasks. Max Laier bugs current@ and hackers@ every two months, [1] then
publisheswhatever came in. [2,3] They used to ask for emails IIRC, now I see there's a report submission form on
theweb. [4]
[1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=freebsd-current&m=115126459006810 [2]
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=freebsd-current&m=115265674914807 [3] http://www.freebsd.org/news/status/ [4]
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/monthly.cgi
--
How many Vietnam vets does it take to screw in a light bulb?
You don't know, man. You don't KNOW.
Cause you weren't THERE. http://bash.org/?255991
