Where is the pfSense 2.4.x FreeBSD OS source code
-
You aren't really reaponding.
Just telling me to dig through the internet to prove to you that this isn't the first time this discussion has come up.
I already said dok isn't the first, you know this. You just attempted to invalidate his inquiry "because attitude" and move on like nothing happened.
There's no point in me digging through the internet to prove to you what you already know.
I'm confident that if you are willing to invalidate doks questions and ban him because he didn't use his inside voice with you then you'll do the same with any other person who asks the question. So what's the point in wasting my time.
Like I said, you aren't going to change your tune for anyone.
Prove me wrong. You only stand to benefit.
-
Well you've got long threads on this forum about the problems of 2.4.x
No one here wants pfSense to stop. We're here because we like and support it.
It is both possible and normal to support something in general without agreeing on every point. You simply harbor a highly defensive attitude.
-
You aren't really reaponding.
Just telling me to dig through the internet to prove to you that this isn't the first time this discussion has come up.
I already said dok isn't the first, you know this. You just attempted to invalidate his inquiry "because attitude" and move on like nothing happened.
There's no point in me digging through the internet to prove to you what you already know.
Then why do you bother commenting if you're not willing to provide any proof to your claims? What's the point of your comments?
I'm confident that if you are willing to invalidate doks questions and ban him because he didn't use his inside voice with you then you'll do the same with any other person who asks the question. So what's the point in wasting my time.
I was really clear why dok was banned.
Like I said, you aren't going to change your tune for anyone.
Prove me wrong. You only stand to benefit.
Did you not read my explanation on why was Dok banned?
Oh and are you really going to ignore my question whether you were previously banned from our forums?
-
Honestly, I don't have a horse in this race. I just use this for my home network and I think it's great.
Me too. And having been around this forum and many others like it, this was until today one of the best. I'm sure many here were also users of M0n0 and then FreeNAS back in the day. Anyone remember that forum? Whoa.
Without knowing the inner workings of the various BSD and other licenses involved I agree that the question has still not been answered. It's been mentioned many times that the only difference between the community edition and the Netgate version is a couple of VPN and cloud packages. Knowing that pfSense was open source I expected that meant every last line regardless of edition.
Why would any fix that that will ultimately be incorporated into an upstream open source project remain closed unless it relates to some not-yet-in-the-wild vulnerability? I understand "when it's ready" as it relates to releases, but what about a few lines of code related to a bug fix? I assure you that had the mod/dev team responses been a bit more clear I certainly would not be jumping in.
I have zero plans to ever build pfSense but thought I knew was open source meant, or at least expected that if closed source existed in the either version it would be made very clear.
-
The topic isn't dok, it's the question he asked and you didn't answer.
And yes, you did ban me before as pfBasic - because you personally had issues with me, not because of any community issue.
Obviously your bans mean nothing, other than public statements of your own intolerance.
Clearly you'll ban this account now, clearly I'll just make a different account in about 90 seconds and bypass your ban again… Or just log onto another account that already exists. ::) Lol.
-
Well you've got long threads on this forum about the problems of 2.4.x
No one here wants pfSense to stop. We're here because we like and support it.
It is both possible and normal to support something in general without agreeing on every point. You simply harbor a highly defensive attitude.
You are contradicting yourself. You insult the project and its developers and then claim you like and support it. Responding to your insults doesn't make me defensive.
-
The topic isn't dok, it's the question he asked and you didn't answer.
And yes, you did ban me before as pfBasic - because you personally had issues with me, not because of any community issue.
Obviously your bans mean nothing, other than public statements of your own intolerance.
Clearly you'll ban this account now, clearly I'll just make a different account in about 90 seconds and bypass your ban again… Or just log onto another account that already exists. ::) Lol.
Thank you. I really appreciate you coming clean. And no, you didn't get banned because I had "issues with you". You promoted a 3rd party product on our forums. Then you created an alt account and complained to JimP about my attitude.
Don't worry though, I'm not going to ban you now. But I will stop you from trolling on our forums. I just want everyone to see with what type we have to deal with.
-
A 3rd party product complimentary to yours in no way competing with it, which I had no stake in.
You advertise your own attitude to the community.
-
You don't really have any credibility left to make such claims. pfMonitor was welcome on our forums until it went commercial. Are there any more topics to discuss about or are you done?
-
No, you win.
-
I'm getting tired of this. This thread is attracting trolls and those with questionable intentions so don't expect me to allow this freak show to continue. I also obviously removed belt9 from our forums as he was circumventing previously issued ban. I do appreciate he did admit that he is pfBasic.
Please don't open any more threads about this as it's clear that pfSense is open source. FreeBSD-src will be upstreamed when it's ready and not when dok and other projects demand it. Thread locked.
