[illumen]

I don't like that this gossip thread from a few years ago is at the top. People come to Hackernews for entertainment (including me), but I still don't like it. Mainly I'm here so I can learn things, and see what other people are doing. The gossip side of things is sort of annoying.

It's much more interesting to compare the development process of the groups, and how the two groups will help each other.

I always thought if OpenBSD had modern development tools and processes they would do really well, but unfortunately there are too many risks. How they're doing it works well for them already. But perhaps this situation with another group working in a different way better again. Since this project can experiment, and anything that is proven can be taken on by OpenBSD.

[hhw]

A thread with some of the people most directly involved, including OpenBSD's founder, on how the fork happened is as relevant to the subject at hand as it gets. Not sure why you view it as gossip. It also directly answers your question on how the two groups will help each other i.e. not much at all.

[clarry]

> It also directly answers your question on how the two groups will help each other i.e. not much at all.

Hopefully the bitterness surrounding the fork's birth will eventually wash away and the people involved just look at the benefits. And it's not true that the two groups aren't helping each other. Some code does flow between OpenBSD and Bitrig, just as it does between OpenBSD and NetBSD. And there are people who are involved in both, and communicating with developers from both projects.

[clarry]

> I always thought if OpenBSD had modern development tools and processes

I just don't understand this attitude. Git and Clang or GCC 4.bleedingedge.something don't write the code for you. Is having to commit to an older VCS really that high a barrier to entry for developers? Because if it is, that makes me suspicious of their skills and focus.