Slashdot Mirror
The Future of NetBSD
ErisCalmsme writes "In this email Charles Hannum (one of the founders of NetBSD) tells us that 'The NetBSD Project has stagnated to the point of irrelevance. It has gotten to the point that being associated with the project is often more of a liability than an asset. I will attempt to explain how this happened, what the current state of affairs is, and what needs to be done to attempt to fix the situation.' What will happen to NetBSD?"
Okay... I'm just gonna sound off here, as AC.. mostly because this could start a holy war and i don't feel like karma whoring. Which is agaisnt my intentions.
This is simple, I've been a long time linux supporter, user, and contributor. Not one of these slashdot citizens that everytime a new "feature" of Windows version "X" is leaked, go and bitch about installing "Linux distro flavor of the month" on there machine and never use windows again. Then turn around and get the new version of Windows "X".
With that said, this news is both sad, and slightly hopeful for me. As much as I love Linux. I've had a soft spot for NetBSD. Mostly because it can run on anything, really portable and good for embed, applications were Linux is just to heavy. Also for securiy, its one of the best.
I'm also hopeful. NetBSD is a niche' OS, and one hell of a good one. Maybe the light of this could help get people to turn the project around. I for one and downloading the entire source tree as I type. For one, so i havee a virgin copy of release 4.0 and the latest CVS, and for two... to see if maybe i could help out with something. If only in a small way.
Even if I don't plan on using NetBSD on my desktop, which is SuSE 10.1 btw, I beleive it still as much to do in the niche applications, because oif we let niche OSes fail. And one OS expands to do everything, we all lose, and end up in another Microsoft Windows style mess.
Thats my 2 cents for the night.
In a world with Linux, Solaris, OS X (a BSD, sorta), a zillion types of Windows, QNX, etc... why do we need so many BSDs? I mean, if someone wants to make their own version of an OSS project, that's up to them, but if you want to be relevant, you have to offer something new and relevant. If I'm going to run BSD on a server, I'm going to run something security oriented like OpenBSD so I can spend more time developing my applications.
I think the NetBSD folks have done some great work in the past, and it deserves to be remembered, but maybe it's best that they apply their efforts to some more relevant projects, such as another BSD, or better yet, Linux, which has been constantly lagging behind OpenBSD in security and the like.
Diversity is a powerful part of the FOSS model, however it can also dilute things by spreading resources to thin. Thanks for your hard work guys -- lets move on to the next challenge!
I used to love NetBSD. The package management is indeed great. BUT :
I really wanted to stick to NetBSD, but after 1 year trying to have it functionnal, I installed linux, and this day, all my problems were gone.
I'm afraid that the great thing in NetBSD - which is multiple platforms support - will soon be irrelevant, since linux already supports all the currently-used architectures.
In all case, I hope NetBSD will survive and become more usable. But as said, it needs a lot of work.
It's seldom that a founder of a OSS project acknowledges his mistakes but Charles M. Hannum does it. Just for this simple action I value his reasoning very much.
IMO leadership of a project is very important because leaders always have a vision and the drive to force this vision become true. There's no guaranty that a leader will be successful with his vision but definitely comities always will fail they never have a single vision and never can agree to force a single vision become true. So whenever a project is lead by a comity stagnation is not far off.
Yet leadership does not mean dictatorship as often is done by many OSS project leaders. Dictators will equally bring a project down as do comities. There's unfortunately no clear distinction when a leader becomes a dictator as many times good leaders are just lucky avoiding the path to dictatorship by sheer luck.
O. Wyss
See http://wyoguide.sf.net/papers/Cross-platform.html
Pay more attention next time. That is outdated news. OpenBSD made it through by picking up some major sponsors, including other F/OSS projects that use part of OpenBSD's code in thier projects.
If you'd read the email log more closely, you'd notice that Charles Hannum one of those who was involved in the removal of de Raadt's commit privileges, but then tried to come up with a workable way for Theo to continue working on the project. The whole story has never come out, as the NetBSD core group kept very quiet about what the motivation for removing de Raadt's commit privileges were. However what is not in doubt is that Theo's attitude on the NetBSD mailing lists was abusive towards anyone who he felt was not as technically competent or as well informed as him. This was annoying fellow developers and alienating potential users. Theo was asked to tone down his attitude, or at least ignore postings that he would otherwise have posted inflammatory replies to. He didn't, and my assumption is that the core group removed the commit privileges to distant the "official" project from Theo's shitty attitude. Theo obviously resented this, but continued to badmouth people until he finally forked NetBSD to create OpenBSD - a sandpit where he could fuck people off to his hearts content.
Now it seems Charles Hannum is pissed at someone, and has decided to belittle the work of many current NetBSD developers by cross posting his flame to the Free, Net and Open mailing lists. My opinion for what it's worth? The NetBSD Foundation appears to be dominated by Wasabi personnel, and as a result the decisions it takes may be in the interests of Wasabi commercial interests rather than Charles Hannums. However, there is good work going on in the NetBSD project, and all Hannum's post will do is make the Linux/anti-BSD zealots shriller.
If the NetBSD project dies, it will be an interesting to watch from a mad scientists/vivisectionist viewpoint.
One of the important things about free/open source software is that it's not tied to an organization. This is very important in the survival of software.
I'd like to put for the following conjecture:
For example, provided that nothing fundamental to the Linux kernel violates patents, I'd suggest that the Linux kernel is immortal. (1) It is complex, but has a huge number of users; (2) While BSD would be the most logical move (possibly a BSD distribution using the BSD kernel with GNU tools?), it would require a modest amount of retraining for things like networking and system administration. (3) So far as we know there are no credible assertions of IP violations in the Linux kernel.
NetBSD, I'd suggest, is a candidate for extinction under this conjecture.
(1) It is complex relative to the number of users: see the article's discussion of problems with threading and multiple processors. Of the three "big" BSD distros, it has by far the fewest numbers of users.
(2) It is probable that mostof its users can switch to a different BSD with very little trouble. NetBSD's reputation is that it is the most portable of the BSDs, not the most featureful. Therefore if you can switch, it should be easy. The only group that would drive further maintenance would be people who run NetBSD on very old computers not supported by other operating systems.
(3) Patent problems: none known at this time.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
It's not because I have anything against it, it's just that everytime I think about NetBSD I can't come up with a REASON for running it (other than for pure nerd exploration purposes).
If I want to be secure I run OpenBSD, if I like the "UNIX" model over the "LINUX" way of grokking things I'll run FreeBSD. In the past NetBSD's mantra was portability. I don't think that's a big enough selling point.
Differentiation is what sells (it seems). NetBSD needs to be something the others are not doing.
I hope it survives and hope that the people involved are mature enough not to let their EGO's get in the way.
In some ways they have a GOLDEN opportunity. NetBSD is far enough along that they don't have to start from scratch, but small enough (organization wise) to allow them to possibly do something that LINUX and FreeBSD are too big to handle.
I don't know what that is..but I hope it's something cool!