Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

To make my long-winded point more concretely, the core diference is really just that there are "so many" Linux developers.

Linus has a pretty firm hand on the tiller of Linux evolution. I counter "don't care what happen outside of the kernel" with his many, many public "never, ever break userland" rants. And many kernel devs and maintainers are employees of companies like Intel, Red Hat, Google, IBM, and AMD that absolutely care about coordinating kernel dev with the bigger picture.

Something like 250 devs contribute to FreeBSD each year. For just the Linux kernel, the number is closer to 5000. There are just way more people working on way more stuff. It is not a surprise to see a more significant halo of chaos around Linux. Coordinating the Linux kernel is herding cats and, even when everybody eventually lines up, there are going to be periods where it seems like everybody is talking past each other.

And while the Linux kernel does have a "release early, release often" mantra, it also touts "trust but verify" and has a strong meritocracy and hierarchy. So I am not sure "no one seem to communicate with each other" is fair. Not just anybody can drop whatever they want into Linux. We also need to remember that shipping the Linux kernel is not the same as shipping a Linux distro (operating system). Actual Linux distros bring kernel versions in according to the philosophy of the distro. Many are very stable and conservative. Others are a whole lot less so (but that is users choice).



Isn't this more telling though? that with vastly less developers they've built a system comparable to linux? This is what happens when you have direction.


I think less direction and more design. And 40+ years of history doesn't hurt either.

But yes, it's impressive how well FreeBSD does considering the relative size of the developer communities.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: