Re: 3.4 CDs

[Peter Fairbrother <zenadsl6186@zen.co.uk>]

Tony Campisi wrote:

>> I personally don't find it directly inconvenient at all. Do others? I
> didn't think of that when I brought the point up.
>> I do see the 6-monthly release cycle as something that damages the
> quality of the releases, and of the OS as a whole.
>> And that I do find inconvenient.
>> -- 
>> Peter Fairbrother
> 
> http://www.openbsd.org/testimonials.html
> 
> [quote]Security Engineer Tyler Allison writes:
> I have installed, secured, and maintained Linux, Windows NT and OpenBSD
> in highly secure environments. (yes you can secure Linux and Windows NT
> in this environment :) ). Having said that I have to point out that if
> you want a minimum administration to keep up with security issues option
> you need to pick OpenBSD by far. It is not uncommon for people to go
> years without updating their production OpenBSD machines because they
> are just rock solid and there are no known "remote" vulnerabilities.
> Thus no good reason to upgrade...[/quote]

I mostly agree. But what has that got to do with it?

> Maybe yall can have a mind-meld or something?
> 
> T-Shirt Idea:  Politics, Religion and OpenBSD. Arguments just waiting to
> happen.

Sad, isn't it. 

I'm trying to start a discussion about ways to improve OpenBSD, and whether
the 6-month cycle is good for OpenBSD, and people either think I'm knocking
it and start defending it and saying how good it is: or, like Theo, they
refuse to discuss it.

I don't know why I bother. Actually I do - I think OpenBSD is pretty darn
good - but it could be better. And in my opinion one way to make it better
would be to change, or at the very least examine the rationale for, the 6
month release cycle.



Perhaps we also need to ask why there are releases at all? For the
developers? I'd wouldn't think they'd need them.

To get money? To make it free? Free for the users, or the developers?

For the users? To share the good stuff? Because then some consideration of
their needs is necessary, and the balance between the developers and the
user's needs is too often ignored - it's just "shut up and hack".

Me? My wishes are simple - make it the best you can. If a 6-month release
cycle is the best way to do that, then fine. But I don't think it is.

-- 
Peter Fairbrother