Re: Slow DOWN, please!!!

[Tarkan Erimer <tarkan@netone.net.tr>]

David Newall wrote:
> Yes.  The Linux process is becoming unreliable.  Newly "stable" versions
> have stability problems.  The development process looks childish. 
> Seasoned developers say not to worry, that the process works.  I do
> worry.  BSD seems more attractive, and it may even be worth the
> considerable effort to switch my entire client-base.  Linux was lucky to
> gain the foothold that it did: traditionally, BSD had a better system
> with a less restrictive licence, so it is surprising that manufacturers
> chose to go with Linux.  BSD still has a less restrictive licence and
> when mainstream press becomes interested in Linux's quality problems
> it's adoption will fall.  BSD is still a good, maybe even better, option.
>
> Linus, this is your baby and so it's your problem.  Only you have the
> influence to change things.
>   
I completely disagree with your foolish and nonsense comments about the 
Linux Kernel and the Linux OS. It's perfectly clear that you didn't 
understand well enough how the linux development process works. If you 
thought that the recently released kernels are not stable then, you have 
to wait the 2.6.x.y series or you can use the distro kernels. All of 
your comments are pointless and no base. You are free to choose BSD or 
whatever you want to use. No one is putting a gun on your head to use 
Linux :-)

I can very easily say that,cause of my experiences , the Linux Kernel is 
PERFECTLY STABLE! I work in an one of the largest ISP of my country and 
I use Linux very intensively under very high loads and I NEVER NEVER 
faced any problems because of the fault of the Linux Kernel on my 
environments. For example, many of our mail servers run on Linux and all 
the day they process hundred thousands emails without any downtime or 
trouble!

The manufactures mostly choose Linux instead of BSD flavors, simply 
because of that Linux kernel, technically, more superior to BSDs or 
others. When it comes to licenses: the BSD license is more and more 
worse, if GPL is bad. GPL protects your freedom and openness of the 
codes via forcing the changes to the source code must be return in open 
form. For BSD, it is opposite. You are free to take someone else's code 
and there is NO PROTECTION to prevent your code to become a closed 
(proprietary) source. Can you imagine that one company (like Microsoft) 
takes your whole kernel source code and creates a PROPRIETARY OS (Like 
Windows!) as making a fool of you ? Why? Because; simply, BSD license 
allows it! No need to return the code! Do you think really think that 
BSD license is more free as making a fool of you ?