[Hmm... half of this doesn't need to be on-list. Sorry if I'm
polluting. -Adam]
On 14-10-23 05:57 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
I get that Jim rubs a lot of people the wrong way (myself included),
Darn, you’d think that sharing a last name would count for something...
Sorry, no. ;-)
Kind of in the same way Theo de Raadt rubs people the wrong way. Mostly
just idiots & newbies take offense. And it's mostly driven, I think, by
having your lifetime supply of tolerance for people who speak first and
think second be long-since exhausted. So as long as you don't start
saying incorrect or technically-invalid things, your audience sticks
around. See closing comments, below.
I think some people are waiting for “the other shoe to drop”. For us to take
the pfSense project in a direction similar to what happened with Vyatta.
Yeah... it's a possibility. OTOH, I'll point out that UBNT essentially
forked Vyatta (and renamed it "EdgeOS", IIRC) when Brocade started to
close it all up. Not that UBNT is a paragon of openness, either, but
that's the benefit of the appropriate license - everyone can feel free
to copy (or fork!) pfSense from any of the multitude of places it lives
online right now, and feel free to burn it to archival WORM media Just
In Case Something Bad Happens To The Project.
As Jim pointed out, however, when you resurrect it (and somehow replace
all the infrastructure and developers in one fell swoop, *ahem*), you
can't call your new project pfSense. You can have an FAQ entry
explaining how it used to be pfSense, you can even leave the GIT, or
SVN, or even SCCS repository up as-is with the pfSense name throughout
it, but as soon as you create a derivative work: new project.
... pfSense is going closed source,
Technically, this could happen, but realistically, someone will probably
fork it. And that project will likely die out or remove itself from
public participation, as these things tend to do.
For that matter, remember that pfSense is (sort of) a fork of m0n0wall
from a decade ago in the first place. For different reasons, but
nonetheless.
and Jim Thompson is actually a blood thirsty, extra-terrestrial,
shapeshifting reptile.
Well, that explains a few things! <grin>
Finally, I think there is still a segment of the community who views me with
distrust because I put a license agreement and contributor agreement in front
of access to the source code for the pfSense project. We didn’t articulate
the reasons for doing this very well, and the execution when we did it wasn’t …
optimal.
I wasn't affected by that, and - AFAIK - neither were most of the people
who whine and cadge about a commercial entity being involved.
I don't recall what the license used to be, but clearly the current one
is a custom license that doesn't even attempt to follow the UCB/BSD
license. As long as ESF covered all their legal bases properly, they
can do whatever the f*** they want with the license. I can see how old
contributors might not like the new CLA, though. And I don't know of any
project that has ever pivoted on a license change this way ... optimally.
Ugh… were you around for the 2.1.5 release with the “Gold” menu
front-and-center (and the resultant shitstorm)?
Long before that, yes, but I think I managed to skip the affected
versions by accident, so I forgot all about it / never saw it myself.
Since I've already renewed my gold subscription once by now, clearly I
wasn't one of the shit-flingers in the shitstorm. I like getting paid
for my work, too!
(Or wonder in silence what it must be like to work in the same place as Jim
Thompson.)
Can't be any worse than my last corporate job. In fact, would probably
be *much* better... I don't have to like you to respect you or work
with/for you.
--
-Adam Thompson
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
List mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
