On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 01:19:55AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:

quoted text
> On Feb 18, 2008 1:04 AM, Marco Peereboom  wrote:

> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 12:23:44AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:

> > > Its good to know that Ted did indeed try to scratch an itch of his and

> > > laid down some ground work for future developers to take it beyond its

> > > basic level.

> > > But, it would have been *nicer* if Ted had put in some more of his

> > > time and effort to complete what he started.

> > > Also, we don't get to use his code for FREE, I suppose most of the

> > > users *buy* CD sets.

> >

> > This is an outrageous comment.  You can not expect anyone to do anything

> > for you.  That simply is not how this world works.  You can wish for

> > things all day long but that will not make it so.  What will make it so

> > is by spending huge amounts of time and effort.  He put both in and got

> > it to a point that was good enough for him.  You can not expect anything

> > more than that.  This really is where the OpenBSD "shut-up-and-hack"

> > mentality comes from.  Who are you to tell Ted what to do?

>

> I'm not telling Ted what to do at all, you're just assuming it in your

> blind fury over me coming out with the truth that most of *your*

> coding effort is directly or indirectly supported by non-developer

> users who do so by buying CDs, making monetary donations and the like.

> 

None of my code that I commited was payed by CD sales. Honestly your

attitude is atrocious. Most of our coding effort is done in spare time and

is unpayed.
> > Would I like rthreads?  sure I would!  I even contributed to the code

quoted text
> > that's how bad I want it.  But I can and will not ask Ted to do anything

> > beyond what he wants to invest on it.

> >

> > Buying the CDs keeps the project going.  Ted does not get paid or

> > benefit otherwise from the project.  In fact he shows up at hackathons

> > and invests significant amounts of his own money to do so.  You are

> > insulting not just him but everyone in the OpenBSD project saying these

> > things.

>

> Marco you are an idiot, you should stick to coding, don't come in the

> real world, you'll get wasted.

>

> > > The problem that would get solved would be best presented by the

> > > following article http://research.sun.com/minds/2007-0710/

> >

> > I didn't read anything that fixes any problem that exists today.  Sure

> > it's a neat research project, no debate there.  Whenever or if it

> > becomes interesting in the real world somebody in this project will

> > re-evaluate its merit.

>

> That's why I called you an idiot.

> The project is not a research project, but a real live production

> grade code working under Solaris 10.

> 

Wow, your comparing OpenBSD with a multimilion dollar company.

Btw. did I mention my network stack developement effort code name

"fire extinguisher"?

Fire extinguisher will be fully buzzword compliant including top of the

edge technology like MPLS, VRF, VRF lite, virtual firewalls, L2TP and many

additional things I never heared of. 
But as it is done on spare time it will take some time to finish it -- oh,

no wait we're all payed by the CD sales and can hack all day long like the

SUN developers. Weee cool.
> > > Not really, I'm not insulting you or any of the core developers.

quoted text
> > > What I meant is newer features.

> > > Why is it that our soft-updates based file system can't do background 'fsck'?

> >

> > Because what the other projects did is wrong.  A background fsck renders

> > a system useless.  I don't think having a background fsck that prevents

> > my machine from booting is about as useful as not having it.  Do I want

> > it? of course I do but not bad enough to write the code myself.

>

> So what you are saying is that what the god father of BSD file systems

> (Marshal Kirk McKusik) is doing is wrong?

> 

Maybe you should go listen to some of McKusik's talks. I remeber him

saying that background fsck was a bad idea and wrongly implemented.
> > > True, your investment as well as *ours*.

quoted text
> >

> > How are you investing?  Typing up an email does not constitute

> > "investment".  Sweating over a few lines of code for days on end is.

>

> The investment is not just from me, its from all those users who don't

> code, but still support the project by buying CDs, T-Shirts, make

> donations and help out developers by supporting their wish lists.

> 

To make that true a lot more CDs, T-Shirts sales and donations need to

made. I will happily implement user requests when everything is payed by

OpenBSD money and I don't need a real job to rent my flat and get some

food on the table. Until the I do what I like to do in my spare time.
> > > I'm not belittling the developers, just that I really got irritated

quoted text
> > > when I lost 5 of the best developers (who were going to start work on

> > > a new TCP/IP stack) I'd gathered because Ted lost interest in his own

> > > work.

> >

> > Every time you say "would be nice", "they should" or "why not?" you are

> > belittling someone's blood sweat and tears.  Ted gave you the starting

> > point, go ahead and finish it.  That is cooperative code development in

> > action.

>

> Actually what Ted has done was utterly disastrous, he knows his own

> code well enough to have completed it.

> BTW, you are as big an oaf as Richard Stallman, you keep ranting about

> how you've put in your blood, sweat and tears, but forget to

> understand the point that without us users you are nothing.

> 

Mwahahahahahahahahahahahaha, hahahahahahahaha, hahahahahahaha.

Do you think that Marco needs users to define himself?

--

:wq Claudio