Slashdot Mirror
FreeBSD Core Developer Thrown Out
SlashChick writes "From a discussion on the freebsd-chat mailing list, it appears that one of the FreeBSD core developers, Matt Dillon, has been barred from committing any changes to the FreeBSD kernel. Dillon was one of the developers 'responsible for making FreeBSD 4.x the most rugged and stress-proof free operating system in existence,' and also contributed to fixing the Linux VM. Unfortunately, there has been little explanation from the FreeBSD core team about why Dillon was thrown out, leading to speculation and worries about the future of the FreeBSD kernel. Does the Slashdot community have any more insight into this situation? Would someone from the FreeBSD team care to elaborate and assuage our worries?" CD Update: Greg Lehey from the core team has infact elaborated in this comment.
but I would think that the reason he was barred would be for the same reason most people are:
Differences in opinion. Maybe I am wrong (NEVER!) but that would be my guess.
Sent from your iPad.
The devil made them do it.
I think that's fairly clear. There are many strong, good hackers in this world who wouldn't be able to work together. While it's unfortunate that Matt and the rest of -core weren't able to resolve it, it's a fact of life in a big project...
Wow, actor and leet BSD Developer! Who'd have thunk?
Hey probably wanted to make a new variant, like ExpensiveBSD or UltraFreeBSD or CoolBSD
Or maybe he admitted to owning a copy of Windows XP?
Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com
Miguel de incaza gets chucked out of gnome, helps kde instead.
Great, as if there aren't enough BSD branches, here's another disgruntled deveoper that might pull a De Raadt and roll his own.
On that note, it's more likely would get adopted by one of the other BSDs, and not really need to start his own. I'm sure OpenBSD can use the help.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
One thing the BSD developers need to know is that they have no justification in keeping this secret. It is aboput the users after all.
"A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
yeh, I'm marking c++ lab exercises now, and I can tell ya, people that don't comment enough surely don't make it easy on those people that have to understand their code.
well, an actor atleast...
Oddly enough, it was a very similar event that led to the creation of the OpenBSD project. Theo started it after a (rather extended, IIRC) tiff with the rest of the NetBSD core team.
If Matt decides to fork the code and start his own project, I think the technical world would be a better place for it. A fifth open source BSD might seem excessive to some, but there are still many ways for such a project to differentiate itself.
unixkb.com -- articles on practical Unix issues.
People choose FreeBSD, NetBSD, *BSD, anything else because, for them, it fits the bill. I'll be the first to say that I love to push Linux anywhere I see it can make a difference but I'll be honest, I've done my fair share of pushing XP, *BSD, OS/2, 98, NT, OS X, anything that will get the job done for the user. FreeBSD and any of the BSDs for that matter are excellent backend systems. Rock solid, stable, not a lot of fluff, they are there and that's all that needs to be said.
:)
Linux boxen can be made just as stable, just as reliable, just as "there" as any BSD. I guess in a round about way I'm saying it comes down to preference and familiarity just like anything else. I'm familiar with Linux (11+ years familiar). I'm not as familiar with BSD (only about 5 years now) but I know a good deal of its strengths and weaknesses and I'm happy to say that there are places I would put BSD right now and not one of the Linux distros (barring Slackware or my own) just because of extra work involved that should be unnecessary.
Ok, done ranting.
Cliff
sigs are like a box of chocolates, they all suck remove the underscores to email me
They caught him using Windows XP at home.
... Gossip for Nerds, Stuff that chatters.
I know, its not even funny.
Everybody has a purpose in life, maybe mine is to lurk in slashdot.
Firstly, the FreeBSD Core team (the use of "core developer" in the title of the article could be misleading) have given a lengthy explanation of this decision on the developers private list. This is where the explanation belongs and where it should stay. The reasons and the action are internal to the project and don't need to be aired in public.
Secondly, Matt is not the first, nor the last I dare say, high profile developer to leave the project. It didn't mean the death of FreeBSD then, it doesn't now. No single developer, no matter how talented and hard working, is irreplaceable. While Matt's technical contributions will certainly be missed, the claims of "imminent death, film at 11" are the same baseless FUD that came out when Mike Smith left or would have come out when John Dyson left (had Slashdot been around).
Thirdly, Matt is still free to contribute should he so wish. The only difference is that he will now have to contribute through PRs, at least for the near future, just as every other contributor started off doing, rather than directly committing himself. Whether he chooses to do this once the dust has settled is, of course, up to Matt.
Finally, long live FreeBSD! Can we please get back to worthwhile stories now :).
Theo de Raadt Version 2.0
...
... A deja vu is usually a glitch in the Matrix"
"FreeBSD Core Developer Guy: A black cat went past us, and then another that looked just
FreeBSD Core Developer Girl: How much
like it, was it the same cat?
Theo de Raadt Version 2.0
Snowdog
Um, Matt? There's a small problem... You forgot to put a cover sheet on your last TSP report, I'm afraid we're going to have to kick you off the development team.
Suffice to say, the ends do not justify the means.
I don't know how the core team manages its repositories, or what their submission policy is, but I would interpret this move as analogous to revoking MD's write access to cvs. I'm sure he's 'welcome' to continue to submit patches, just like any other schmoe. And of course, he's always free to fork..
So long, and thanks for all the Phish
First, remember that there is no magic bullet. There are always tradeoffs with anything. Linux has definate strong points (new hardware support usually hits linux first; there are more developers for linux). FreeBSD has fewer developers, and doesn't support the newest hardware as quickly - but the (FreeBSD) network stack is extremely solid, and the system design is very clean.
So, you have to evaluate your goals in these kinds of situations. Are you out to get the newest hardware and features, or are you looking for a clean design and good performance.
There is a reason many sites (like Yahoo, imdb, cr.yp.to) use Open/FreeBSD to run their servers.
If that's not one of your priorities, but you're still curious: I'd still take a look at FreeBSD; the overall design is quite pleasant to work with.
Also, many of the exploits produced are usually done on Linux, at least initially. This could buy you a little extra lead-time when something malicious is released. It's not security by obscurity, but it is a fringe benefit.
As always, if you're truly curious as to which OS would suit you best, you should put a little effort into it, and do some research yourself. I'm not saying you shouldn't use Linux, and I'm not saying you should use FreeBSD. FreeBSD is not for everyone. Linux is not for everyone. Do the research, decide for yourself, and next time - when you feel the urge to ask "why use *BSD?" -- you'll be able to at least discuss what you do or don't like about either. Otherwise, you end up contributing nothing to the discussion.
I was told that I could listen to the radio at a reasonable volume from nine to eleven...
Perhaps he stole someones stapler?
Of course that's the whole BSD movement, 2 developers get their panties in a bunch and instead of either one of them being big enough to compromise they fork. You can't tell me that the OpenBSD folks aren't doing things that all BSDs benefit from, same for FreeBSD and their amazing accomplishments. FreeBSD has been strong so far but it's sad to see them drop to that same level.
Just as 5.0 was coming out and there seemed to be this general quietness about freedom and the GPL and RMS bashing seemed to be at an acceptable high point the good lads at FreeBSD go and remind us all again what open and freedom is all about.
What does this have to do with GPL or its attitude? Linus could just as easily bar kernel patch submission from some individual who he thought was causing problems.
This problem individual could just as easily keep on running with his own special kernel, with all these swell changes Linux kept rejecting. Same goes for FreeBSD- you can get the source, and this guy, or anyone, could keep on writing new code, patching their setup and giving the away the code.
Just because a project is GPL doesn't mean that it'll take code from anyone, or have a CVS server to which anyone could commit. From where would you get this silly idea?
Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
The only difference between the bitchy whining children in open source development and the bitchy whining children in closed source development is that the latter have signed NDAs that keep the pissing contests out of the public spotlight.
- Matt Dillon was never a "core developer". The FreeBSD project doesn't use that term, but it looks like a reference to the core team. Matt has never been a member of the core team.
- Matt has done some very good work over the years. His contribution to FreeBSD release 4 was invaluable, but it would be wrong to suggest that he single-handedly made the difference. Commit statistics on the orginal list show that he has not been very active over the last 12 months.
- I was not aware of his involvement with Linux VM. Nothing we have done will change this, though.
- The FreeBSD core team has informed the development community in detail about the reasons for Matt's removal. We don't think it's appropriate, nor fair to Matt, to wash dirty linen in public.
- Matt has very little influence on the future of the FreeBSD kernel. That work which he has done over the last two years or so was mainly maintenance.
It's always sad to have to make these decisions. It's even more difficult to defend them when our hands are tied behind our backs.It is incredibly frustrating to read Slashdot whenever something like this comes up, because so many people (Linux people, it seems) confuse Core with the body of committers, despite the fact that we go through this exercise over and over again.
It seems to have started when Dillon made a clever hack and people got arguing over API problems:
...
...
The problem
The solution
NOT another solution
The flamewar starts..
and continues.
On the other hand, Matt is not, and never has been, indispensible to the FreeBSD project. His biggest contribution probably has been cultural more than anything else -- he was working at UCB back in the "real" BSD days and knows how "it spozed to be". I suspect that doesn't make him popular with some of the (relative) newbies who want to add lots of features and stuff -- Matt's code has always been stripped down, clean, and fast as hell (if not always the most elegant or user-friendly code in the world). If the FreeBSD folks got tired of him carping about "the BSD Way", their loss... but it's not going to cripple FreeBSD by any means.
-E
Send mail here if you want to reach me.
You wrote, 'When it comes to Free software, isn't "the development community" the same as "the public"?'
The two are not the same. I am a consumer of FreeBSD, by virtue of having a Virtual BSD Server from aplus.net. My use of that operating system in no way entitles me to know what transpires between the developers of that OS.
If I want to know the nitty gritty details of OS development, then I need to subscribe to the general mailing lists, read the code, and submit my own work.
Since I'm not prepared to do the above - I am quite happy to be a mere consumer in this case - I don't have any objection to people saying "this is a private matter, it doesn't concern you."
That the source code is available for your perusal is completely unrelated to the behavioral dynamics which govern the production of that code.