David Holland wrote:
The only one of the tasks as such that I have concerns about is the OS branding/boot splash screen thing. However, jmcneill has already told me in so many words that he's not interested in my opinion, and for the time being I don't feel inclined to push any further.
For me, a big concern is that focus is moved away from what I'd consider core issues to "user experience". From my point of view, NetBSD don't have the resources to do everything (and I'm also not interested in everything, but that's another story). However, a well functioning, bug free, and well tuned kernel, basic libraries and device drivers are what I consider very important. This also includes a sane and well functioning build system. A close second is a functioning package system.
I'm saying "bug free" and "functioning". That means for me just that. Ease of use isn't neccesary. Nor is "nice looking", quick to set up, or self-explanatory.
It appears to me that we already seem to be lagging in the kernel department. And we seem to be shifting focus towards "user experience" instead of ironing out the kernel. I know that lots of people find it more satisfying (and ego-boosting) to work on user experience, and to get a larger user base and recognition for the things they do. But I think that in the long run, the looser here is NetBSD itself.
A gut feeling is that time from announced betas to actual release have grown. And the number of bugs in the announced beta have grown as well. These are bad signs. The current versioning scheme makes it look like we're doing a lot on the system (we seem to be running through version numbers prety quick now), but I'm not sure that much really happens, except that a lot of new bugs are introduced.
I'm sure people will call out and say I'm wrong, for various number of reasons. But I'm just relating how it appears to me, watching from the outside. The current (small) userbase of NetBSD has not been attracted to the system because of flashy graphics, smooth user experience and so on. And introducing that will not in general make a big difference to them. If anything, I would suspect that most have come past the point when that was important, and so don't really look for it. Moving the focus in that direction can only alienate a bunch of current users. The target of the shift must then be to try and attract new users. Where will they come from? Linux and Windows, I would suspect. That *do* mean we want to get something like Linux or Windows, because the users that currently use those systems are using them because they want that kind of system. They will not shift to NetBSD unless NetBSD presents the same system, and do it better. Do we expect to be better at that game than Linux? If so, then we must really pour resources into it. And for what? To become Linux?
It just don't make sense to me, but I feel it moves the focus away from what we're good at, and what attracts people to NetBSD.
Basically, I can't see any point at all with this idea, and think it can only be a loosing idea, anyway you look at it.
But that's just my opinion, and as AD stated already at the start, he (they) are not interested in a discussion about wether the idea is good or not.
Now, to round this off before I really try to keep my mouth shut. AD and core is obviously free to do what every they want. It is after all their time we're talking about. However, equally, they can't expect everyone to endorse and unconditionally support their work either. It's a free world for everyone. Nothing is really forcing anyone to keep using or supporting NetBSD.
There, now (I think) I've said all I'm going to say on the subject.
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt%softjar.se@localhost || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol