FreeBSD Foundation Passes '04 Small Donation Needs

MTS writes "Thanks to the generous contributions of over 800 donors, a combination of both first-time donors and existing supportors, the FreeBSD Foundation has met and exceeded its fund-raising goal necessary to qualify for the 1/3 'public support' goal required to maintain its 501(c)3 status with the IRS. Your continued donations will help to support a broad variety of FreeBSD activities, including critical development, developer collaboration, testing, and involvement in standards processes." Convoluted tax laws meant that FreeBSD's success in attracting larger donations had threatened the organization's tax-free status.

Comments

47$ Donations

[Delita]

For those that care, the average donation amounts to about 47$. Even the smallest of donations were quite helpful here. I do wonder if anyone actually donated the 8000$ max...

Re:More about the "quota"?

[compass46]

Audigy support is already in 5.3. It was not in 5.2.1 though. I'm using an Audigy on 5.3 right now.

Re:More about the "quota"?

[molnarcs]

Don't take this guy too seriously. Some sample from his articles:

His SUSE 'review' His FreeBSD 'review'

Some gems (pun intended) from the latter:

FreeBSD 5.x enjoyed an excellent head start in the fully 64-bit AMD64 operating system arena, but now trails the pack, with only Windows XP 64-bit behind it in speed and completeness.

The bold parts are hyperlins to articles that supposed to show how "slow" AMD64 under FreeBSD 5.3 is supposed to be does in no way even mention FreeBSD and in fact only tests SuSE and Fedora Core along with Windows XP SP1. Same with 'completeness'. On the other hand, I remember his amd64 review of FreeBSD 5.2.1 - which was an excellent and well detailed review. I guess he didn't even try FreeBSD on amd64 since then.

And don't even start me on his 'new feature list'. Forgets to mention important things like backports of many features of ULE to SCHED_4BSD, inclusion of pf and altq framwork in the base system (for sysadmins, this is perhaps one of the most important features), multithreaded network stack (although he mentions it elsewhere, but not under new features!), etc. He is even wrong in his pathetic attempt at humour (if it was that) about the naming of ULE:

The ULE (which is not an acronym; its full name is SCHED_ULE as opposed to the older SCHED_4BSD) scheduler continues to have stability and performance problems and was totally disabled instead of being made the default process scheduler in 5.3 as planned.

Well, yes, ULE might not be an acronym, and no, its name is not SCHED_ULE ... name is ULE, SCHED_ULE is the configuration option you put in your kernel file.

I would take this guy's comments with a grain of salt, except for his older work, which I think was excellent (I don't have problems with criticism, and his old amd64 review was quite critical. I have problems with FUD and unsubstantiated claims and badly written articles). What happened to this guy?

Re:Heh

[sean23007]

Actually open source ideals are much more in line with free-market, small-scale capitalism, rather than any form of communism. In fact, it's all much closer to Smith than to Marx. Perhaps you should read them and not spit McCarthyisms at people who might actually know something.