On 18 June 2012 15:46, Raymond Lillard <[email protected]> wrote: > On 06/17/2012 12:31 PM, Peter J. Philipp wrote: >> >> Having followed OpenBSD for quite some time I noticed that good developers >> come and go. They come in, make something great happen, and disappear >> again. >> Also there have been forks and I also noticed that no fork gets a light >> judgment. Rightfully so. And then I always appreciated the permanent >> >> element in OpenBSD that guides our attention to areas we as users and >> sideliners don't always see immediately. I'll keep buying CD's when >> available >> and I do donations here and there when I feel like it, and I don't regret >> it. > > > ditto. > > I almost always remain silent in political matters, > (relating to OpenBSD that is). > > I will list some reasons why I am not going anywhere > soon for a "free" OS. I have been using, donating > hardware and purchasing CDs since 3.0. > > > Reason 1: Legacy Architectures > I have many "legacy " machines in service because they > can be acquired for next to free (sometimes just free). > > These legacy machines are very good at exposing subtle > bugs not found by compiling and running on Intel/AMD > hardware. > > Since these legacy architectures are "strange" in the > i386/AMD64 context, exploiters are unlikely to bother > with them. None of my Internet facing machines are on > popular architectures. > > I have seen attackers come and leave as soon as they > figure out what they are up against. The combination > of OpenBSD and uncommon architectures is a very tough > nut to crack. > > > Reason 2: Security > This is an unknown. All FOSS claims to be free, fast > and secure. Even Microsoft claims to be secure. Maybe > the new team will be as fanatical as Theo, likely not > if their FAQ is to be believed. Their reputation for > security will be revealed with the passage of time. > > > Reason 3: Crypto > I don't know where the new project is located, but > they seem to have a server in Southfield, MI USA and > another in Denmark. I hope none of the developers is > subject to US export laws regarding cryptography and > that the code is maintained on servers also not subject > to those laws. > > Just look at the recent MegaUpLoad case. That case > is reportedly about a bunch of ripped off movies. > I have googled a bit and have not found a physical > location for the project or its code. > > > Reason 4: Stability > The new project FAQ states they intend to be "less > restrictive with the codebase when it comes to > experimenting with features." Maybe in the long run > some of the new features may be introduced into OBSD, > but in the near term I expect much instability given > the broad range of deeply embedded things they intend > to change. > > > Reason 1 is a big problem for me and my crusty old war > horses. Reasons 2 & 3 may be unfounded, the secrecy > here (there are no developer names listed on the project > web site) is not very confidence building. As to > reason 4, I am only mildly interested in fast. I want > correct and stable execution above all else. For this > reason I expect to continue with OBSD for a long time. > > I do have considerable sympathy for clearing GNU out > of the code base though. > > Now going back into lurker mode. > Regards, > Ray
The secretive nature is concerning. But I hope that this situation can somehow turn out to be beneficial to both projects in the long term. As long as my favourite and most relied upon OS continues to evolve, I will be happy. And I will certainly continue to buy from and donate to the OpenBSD project where possible. Shane
