On Tue, 20 Apr 1999, Ken Nakata wrote:

# On 19 Apr 1999 19:31:18 -0400, Mirian Crzig Lennox wrote:
# >...
#
# Oh, I get it.  Combination of coordination and cooperation is
# cathedral whereas competition is bazaar.  I see where you are driving
# at.

No need to be snide...

# I happen to value coordination and cooperation more than competition,
# and so does NetBSD, I believe.  Partly because competition is likely
# to wind up with *lots* of duplicate works that are incompatible with
# each other.

So?  Pick the one which is the most feasible and work on it.  At
least this way you'd have *some*thing to show as effort!

I value cooperation as well, but cooperation works better if it's
open.  The SMP project in question is under sequester, practically.
We as a community have certainly heard precious little other than
"it's in the works".  I think we're owed more than that.


# > FreeBSD community, it's permissible, sometimes even encouraged, for
# > competing groups of people to work on the same feature.  That's the
# > essence of the bazaar.
# 
# Yeah, and there's some big mess caused precisely by this development
# model which I would share with you if I were the first party.

Like I said, that would leave it open to core to pick the best implemen-
tation based on:
	- availability: is this vapourware, or do we have it *now*?
	- stability: ...or is it so buggy we should wait for the
		vapourware to beam down?
	- performance: ...or does the potential performance warrant
		hacking to make it stable?
	- orthogonality:  Can we whack it out to make it fit our current
		model elegantly?

Those are key things to look at when integrating code.  If we don't
encourage SOMEthing to happen in cases of highly desired functionality,
we may watch FreeBSD/OpenBSD/Linux just pass us by, and then NOBODY wins.

# Ken
# 


				--*greywolf;
--
My other car was on Alderaan.