3 ms·

Netgate funds a lot of FreeBSD work, and employs FreeBSD committers. I certainly wouldn't describe them as hostile to open source.

WarOnPrivacy 6y ago
I didn't know that. That's kind of awesome.
droopyEyelids 6y ago
It seems clear to me this is a case of passionate coders with different personalities struggling with the difficult work of human communication in a world with limited resources and time. No one has to be the bad guy here or end up hostile to open source.
tomxor 6y ago
Perhaps entitled is the right word then.
- cperciva 6y ago
  Maybe. It's not necessarily without reason -- if you make a lot of contributions and they are generally very well received, it's quite sensible to anticipate that further contributions will be equally well received and to be surprised if they're not. This was made worse by the unfortunate timing -- the final release candidate is just 3 days away. Any other time, we would have gone slower, had more discussion, et cetera; unfortunately this turned into an emergency.
tedunangst 6y ago
They can be a touch snotty towards developers who aren't freebsd committees.
- cperciva 6y ago
  I think every project has people like that. I can think of some open source projects which are led by people with attitude problems.
  - tptacek 6y ago
    Real subtle, Colin.
    - cperciva 6y ago
      I mean, Linus has openly acknowledged that he has behaved unprofessionally in the emails he sends to people who are trying to contribute. There isn't anything secret here.
      - Crontab 6y ago
        LOL, my first thought was that you were talking about Theo.
        tptacek 6y ago
        I think he was. :)
        kaliszad 6y ago
        Btw. great gathering of people with a *BSD background or friends :-) I think, we all should be way more cool headed. Email doesn't contain the tone and it is very easy to formulate something in a bad way when exhausted or upset. Some people use very strong words that considering their usual style aren't nearly as strong in reality. In this case, the great question is, how did such a bad code (according to Jason) land in the code base at all? Don't other people look at it? Do the FreeBSD developers ignore concerns of other fellow developers until it blows up to beyond community communication circles?
        tptacek 6y ago
        It makes sense to me. As I understand the FreeBSD mailing list posts, it was commissioned commercially, to add a feature to NetGate products. Must have: in-kernel WireGuard for NetGate products. Nice-to-have: a general-purpose FreeBSD kernel WireGuard. The scope crept, and a piece of code that might have been fit for some purpose (whatever limitations NetGate has for its network stack, like "no jumbo frames", etc) was recast as fit for all purposes. I guess Colin would have some insight about the process by which a ports-grade kernel module gets put on track for release in the kernel itself. My take on this is that absolutely no part of the development process that led up to this is Jason's problem. It is not Jason's job to understand or assist or comply with NetGate's product development process; his concern seems to have been, justifiably, exclusively the proposed FreeBSD OS feature. I get the sense that a lot of the friction here comes from pfSense-types thinking that any part of pfSense is everyone's problem.

WarOnPrivacy 6y ago

I didn't know that. That's kind of awesome.

droopyEyelids 6y ago

It seems clear to me this is a case of passionate coders with different personalities struggling with the difficult work of human communication in a world with limited resources and time. No one has to be the bad guy here or end up hostile to open source.

tomxor 6y ago

Perhaps entitled is the right word then.

cperciva 6y ago
Maybe. It's not necessarily without reason -- if you make a lot of contributions and they are generally very well received, it's quite sensible to anticipate that further contributions will be equally well received and to be surprised if they're not. This was made worse by the unfortunate timing -- the final release candidate is just 3 days away. Any other time, we would have gone slower, had more discussion, et cetera; unfortunately this turned into an emergency.

tedunangst 6y ago

They can be a touch snotty towards developers who aren't freebsd committees.

cperciva 6y ago
I think every project has people like that. I can think of some open source projects which are led by people with attitude problems.
- tptacek 6y ago
  Real subtle, Colin.
  - cperciva 6y ago
    I mean, Linus has openly acknowledged that he has behaved unprofessionally in the emails he sends to people who are trying to contribute. There isn't anything secret here.
    - Crontab 6y ago
      LOL, my first thought was that you were talking about Theo.
      - tptacek 6y ago
        I think he was. :)
        kaliszad 6y ago
        Btw. great gathering of people with a *BSD background or friends :-) I think, we all should be way more cool headed. Email doesn't contain the tone and it is very easy to formulate something in a bad way when exhausted or upset. Some people use very strong words that considering their usual style aren't nearly as strong in reality. In this case, the great question is, how did such a bad code (according to Jason) land in the code base at all? Don't other people look at it? Do the FreeBSD developers ignore concerns of other fellow developers until it blows up to beyond community communication circles?
        tptacek 6y ago
        It makes sense to me. As I understand the FreeBSD mailing list posts, it was commissioned commercially, to add a feature to NetGate products. Must have: in-kernel WireGuard for NetGate products. Nice-to-have: a general-purpose FreeBSD kernel WireGuard. The scope crept, and a piece of code that might have been fit for some purpose (whatever limitations NetGate has for its network stack, like "no jumbo frames", etc) was recast as fit for all purposes. I guess Colin would have some insight about the process by which a ports-grade kernel module gets put on track for release in the kernel itself. My take on this is that absolutely no part of the development process that led up to this is Jason's problem. It is not Jason's job to understand or assist or comply with NetGate's product development process; his concern seems to have been, justifiably, exclusively the proposed FreeBSD OS feature. I get the sense that a lot of the friction here comes from pfSense-types thinking that any part of pfSense is everyone's problem.