Re: about GNU Hurd

[Barry deFreese]

Richard Stallman wrote:
>     But, I do not think that this is the right solution.  There are too
>     many chefs trying to cook different stews, and trying to serve it as a
>     single dish; and some only taking up space.  I think the only way to
>     go forward is to remove maintainers, and get one or two people.  It
>     will always be that Roland and Bushenll are the ones who decide what
>     goes into the tree.  And as long as this persists, the Hurd will not
>     move forward.
>
> It doesn't have to work that way.  Another maintainer could install
> fixes if they don't respond.
>
> But we do need a good volunteer for the job; someone who is skilled
> both technically and with people.
>   
Personally I think we need some direction setting before any of it makes 
any sense.  What is the uKernel direction?  Fix existing gnumach, X15, 
L4Sec, Coyotos....?  I realize that doesn't affect Hurd directly but I 
believe it has an impact.

Also, what good is another maintainer with a lack of developers?  Why 
the hell have we had a >2Gb patch for years now that isn't in the 
branch?  What's wrong with it?  Who can fix it?

I've asked this before and I don't mean to be derogatory but do the 
Roland, Thomas, Marcus, Neal's of the world even have an interest 
anymore?  I know that real life gets in the way, hell I've disappeared 
for a couple of months (not that I'm any great contributor) but where 
are we headed?

In fact while I am being frank, what is your level of interest in the 
Hurd Richard?  The few times that I have seen you speak or read your 
commentaries, you don't show much of an interest yourself.  You speak of 
Ututo and others when you have legions of folks that you could probably 
drive to the "GNU System".

I realize that I am going to get grief from the few friends I have in 
the Hurd community for this, and this is not intended to be a flame, but 
I'd really like to understand where we are and where we want to go...

Thanks,

Barry deFreese (aka bddebian)