On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:45 +0100, "Marc Espie" <es...@nerim.net> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 08:11:53AM -0400, Woodchuck wrote: > > Ports/packages are sort of hit-or-miss. > > > > This is a very Spartan situation, and comes from a shortage of > > resources. > > Partly. > > Being able to drop old shit fairly quickly is also very important in > terms > of quality, since we don't have to read through a maze of old code > ifdefs. > > If you prefer, sure it's a shortage of resources. We want to maximize > quality with limited resources, and so we err on the side of aggressive > removal of dying features. > > It would take a *massive* influx of resources to change that situation.
This is a great point in general about OpenBSD. Look at the commits of the Linux kernel or FreeBSD versus the commits of OpenBSD... the difference is huge. Not only in terms of number of commits, but also number of developers making the commits. OpenBSD does a lot with what little they have when compared to other projects... just my opinion. Brad > Even with more resources, we will still prefer quality over long-term > support. With lots and lots of resources, we could possibly reengineer > long-term support without sacrificing quality. > > Think about it. What do you prefer ? half-baked support and badly broken > features, or good support over a limited period of time, and the best > features we can create ?
