3 ms·

> Would you say that Oxide would have chosen Illumos if he wasn't part of the company? I don't know how to respond to this question, because to me it reads lik

> Would you say that Oxide would have chosen Illumos if he wasn't part of the company? I don't know how to respond to this question, because to me it reads like "if things were completely different, what would they be like?" I have no idea if you could even argue that a company could be the same company with different founders. What I can say is that this line of questioning still makes me feel like you're implying that this choice was made simply based on preference. It was not. I am employee #17 at Oxide, and the decision still wasn't made by the time I joined. But again, the choice was made based on a number of technical factors. The RFD wasn't even authored by Bryan, but instead by four other folks at Oxide. We all (well, everyone who wanted to, I say "we" because I in fact did) wrote out the pros and cons of both, and we weighed it like we would weigh any technical decision: that is, not as a battle of sports teams, but as a "hey we need to drive some screws: should we use a screwdriver, a hammer, or something else?" sort of nuts-and-bolts engineering decision.

littlestymaar 3y ago
> we weighed it like we would weigh any technical decision: that is, not as a battle of sports teams, but as a "hey we need to drive some screws: should we use a screwdriver, a hammer, or something else?" sort of nuts-and-bolts engineering decision. I'm not saying otherwise. In fact, when I wrote my original comment, I actually rewrote it multiple time to be sure it wouldn't suggest I was thinking it was some sort of irrational decision (that's why I added the “it's a good fit for what they are doing”), but given your reaction it looks like I failed. Written language is hard, especially in a foreign language, sorry about that.
- steveklabnik 3y ago
  It's all good! I re-wrote what I wrote multiple times as well. Communication is hard. I appreciate you taking the effort, sorry to have misunderstood. Heck, there's a great little mistake of communication in the title: this isn't just "intended" to power the rack, it does power the rack! But they said that because we said that in the README, because that line in the README was written before it ended up happening. Oops!

littlestymaar 3y ago

> we weighed it like we would weigh any technical decision: that is, not as a battle of sports teams, but as a "hey we need to drive some screws: should we use a screwdriver, a hammer, or something else?" sort of nuts-and-bolts engineering decision. I'm not saying otherwise. In fact, when I wrote my original comment, I actually rewrote it multiple time to be sure it wouldn't suggest I was thinking it was some sort of irrational decision (that's why I added the “it's a good fit for what they are doing”), but given your reaction it looks like I failed. Written language is hard, especially in a foreign language, sorry about that.

steveklabnik 3y ago
It's all good! I re-wrote what I wrote multiple times as well. Communication is hard. I appreciate you taking the effort, sorry to have misunderstood. Heck, there's a great little mistake of communication in the title: this isn't just "intended" to power the rack, it does power the rack! But they said that because we said that in the README, because that line in the README was written before it ended up happening. Oops!