Like The Other BSDs, DragonFlyBSD Lags Greatly Behind With Its GPU Support

[System25]

In any case, if BSD had terrible project management, it has nothing to do with what is BSD now.

I do not see what has changed. If we take a look on how DRM/KMS transition has been handled by BSDs, its easy to notice BSDs preferred to ignore it until drivers devs ditched old interfaces. Then there was no choice but to support it. Obvious disadvantage of this approach would be several years of delay, outdated drivers and lack of expertise in field, so it's not Linux who catching up anymore. Now it is BSDs who are catching up. And it was Linux who defined interfaces and shaped its own future in ways it devs see it fits them. I'm not in mood to call something like this good project management. Good project management assumes people can stop being retarded and at least are able to understand VGA graphics era has ended, demands were uplifted, GPUs are mostly about number crunching and there is no going back at this point. Yet I can see, some BSD zealots still showing really uncommon stubbornness - just got recent example (thanks to MoonMoon for little extra proof).

So, what exactly is your definition of "good project management"?

This is hard question. Its much easier to tell when project management goes bad. We all can tell Costa Concordia captain was EPIC FAIL guy. Yet it is much less obvious how to define "good captain", isn't it? . IMHO, when it comes to software, good project management is mostly about keeping things balanced in sane ways. Then it is about being able to make right decisions at right times. It is also about gathering team capable of working on project and then taking care about how it works. This both takes reasonable management and technical skills and mostly comes to decision makingm, which can be complicated and I'm not sure how to give exact definition of that. It takes uncommon set of skills which should be possessed by individual. So only few of mere mortals can be real PMs. This is well known fact in software industry, corporate HRs would usually fight to death when trying to get good PM into their teams. Yet there're far more projects than good PMs. So many software projects doomed to FAIL. This is part of process. And if your ship looks like scrap metal - I wish you best luck to find good captain(s).

You can't just expect to do "good project management" and suddenly have unlimited budget;

Of course. But if you prove you can do it better than others, it wouldn't be an issue. The only problem only few mortals manage to do it right. Most humans are EPIC FAILors. I can admit business only cares about their tasks and they do not care about architecture, doing Teh Greater Good and other abstract crap. There are tasks and they have be done. Those who helps to do it will get whatever business can afford. OSes are somehow needed for business activity, so OSes can also get some investments... if someone understands what it would give in return and that's soulds like what they want to see. Individuals are also going to invest their time if they understand its what they want. From what I can see, BSDs are usually being developed by bunch of arrogant lunatics who only care about their narrow artificial world where Spherical Cows flying in vacuum. They do not give a fsck how their actions would map to other people's tasks/needs, etc. Sure, you can't expect much investments this way. It is logical and have to be expected.

Actually, whole BSD license is FAIL in first place, as it fails to take dirty nature of business into account. When academic guys are doing some work, without any salary - business warmly welcomes it. But if you dare to take THEIR code into your project and haven't paid them, they will try to SUE YOU TO THE HELL unless license/contract explicitly allows it otherwise. Because you are bastard who dares to take THEIR *PROPERTY*. Somehow that's what exactly happened when AT&T filed their infamous lawsuit. Isn't it cool to get lawsuit instead of working together on same code base? I think now you undertand why I think GPL FTW. It explicitly assumes sharing source is norm, not exception. So it looks like if it can convert bunch of greedy business nuts into strong traction force. That's what I call EPIC LIFEHACK. Good job, mr. Stallman, you got it right. It is really interesting idea to launch self spreading algo in form of LICENSE and let it to reshape whole world, making it better place to live in . That's what I call global-scale thinking.

Linux is an incredibly excepcional case. I'm pretty sure Linus never had a "good management"; he was absolutely clueless about the phenomenon Linux would be.

Somehow, successful software projects are exceptions, not norm. As far as I know, most software projects are actually failing. Good PMs are rare. Torvalds somehow manages to do right decisions at right place and right time and he was also able to gather working team and then has been smartass enough not to screw it up. Only few mortals on whole planet can do it like that. Others doomed to be "bunch of masturbating monkeys" (c). While it sounds exceptionally arrogant, it just naming duck the duck because it looks like a duck and behaves like a duck.

Again, Linux is an excepcional case... It has nothing to do with "project management"; neither BSD had terrible "PM" nor Linux had outstanding "PM".

I fail to see better PMs when it comes to OS kernels. For that reasons I would consider it exceptional in particular field of expertise. And it does not takes awful project management to screw things up. Just "bad" or "mediocre" is more than enough to screw projects up. Especially whem you face competitor(s) who is well above average. I dare to call Linux the best example of distributed software development on the planet to the date. Its just amazing how "dictator" can do his best to turn software development distributed (yes, GIT is EPIC WIN, too... and btw, FBSD dullards fail to acknowledge that, being inclined on their outdated SVN shit, even if it hurts project).

So BSD didn't care back then about the "real world", yet everybody was running BSD back then.

As you can see, it was only because there was no other choices. Once alternatives appeared, BSDs mostly gone to oblivion. These days even long term supporters like Yahoo and Apache are deploying new hosts using Linux. Because it usually performs better and easier to maintain. Even patient people can get fed up with crappy project management.

The PROJECT MANAGEMENT do their best to find resources, and do their best to MANAGE efficiently the resources.

I fail to see that. If it would be true, they should be in far better shape. And lack of resources is also consequence of bad project management. Linus did it better and those who needs things to be done turned their attention to Linux. So Linux got resources. BSDs ... originally they were supposed to be on this place. Because, as you've pointed out, there was no other OSes anyway and its not like if those who provide budgets care too much who will do the job and how it will be named. So it would be logical for BSDs to get these resources. But BSDs managed projects so badly that Linux has appeared and Torvalds shown how to do it right. While it maybe not perfect, it has been seriously better. That was enough. Now most resources spent to make Linux even better. Sorry to inform you but it looks like EPIC FAIL.

You can go ahead and look at the FreeBSD Foundation, for example. Not having unlimited resources like Linux DOES NOT translate into bad management.

Its more than enough to face competitor who can do it better. Then Linux got most resources as well. Sounds pretty much like one way ticket into oblivion for BSDs. Well deserved fate, granted bad project management. Bad enough to fail even regardless of better starting conditions.

But you are just an idiot who can't even take some time to think about what he is saying.

I'm just some nut who plays Captain Obvious role. When I see the duck I call it a duck if it looks like a duck and behaves like a duck. Sounds pretty simple, isn't it?

[nasyt]

But still, Mattew Dillon is still wasting his time as there is Linux. He should have joining it

He should rather join the Illumos Project (a OpenSolaris Successor), we need a good Server OS.

instead of contributing to fragmentation of the Open Source World.

Whats bad about that.

Lets see an example: We have a lot of web servers Apache, Hiawatha, Cherokee, thttpd. Should the Hiawatha, Cherokee and thttpd guys have joining the Apache HTTP server project instead of "contributing to fragmentation" of the Web Server World? No.

They should keep going instead of contributing to mono culturalization of the Open Source World.