3 ms·

That was a failure of governance, which was a result of their failure to have an open development model. Linus was very liberal in accepting help from hobbyists

by toyg 4y ago

That was a failure of governance, which was a result of their failure to have an open development model. Linus was very liberal in accepting help from hobbyists and uncredentialed people (people who were hardware-poor, and hence needed support for stuff like dual-booting...), the BSD world has always been more opaque and closed. In a way it was a victory of horizontal, open, "upstart" governance, versus aristocratic and elitist organization.

nortonham 4y ago
BSD's aren't really opaque. I understand what larger point you're trying to make about the difference between linux and bsd development. But the biggest BSD projects all have mailing lists where you can see the decisions being made, and the source of the core of each one is available to everyone.
- johnny22 4y ago
  was that the case during the referenced time period? I think it's more about back then rather than now.
  - nortonham 4y ago
    to be honest I can't be 100% sure about that. But each BSD OS is run differently. AFAIK the source of the base of each one has always been open.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]