Re: Selection of roadmap for i386 platform End-of-Life (EOL)

As a person who's looking for a new "home" in an open source operating
system and think that that may be DragonFly, please allow me to chime in
here by trying to articulate the things that I like about the project.  Of
course these are only my impressions and opinions.

I like that it's forward thinking; a bit of fresh air in a largely stagnant
landscape.
I like that there seems to be a focus on innovation without sacrificing
simplicity.
I like that it does not show the "Me, too!" obsessions of the "Yet Another
Linux" Distributions.
I like that the community seems more accessible and less ego-driven than
other projects.
I particularly like that it seems to be more focused on the hacker rather
than any particular application domain.

I personally don't care for the idea of focusing on one architecture,
because having more is often a forcing function to keep the code tidy and
portable and avoid unnecessary hardware dependencies.  But if that's the
case, make it multiple actively supported and developed
architectures; maybe some sort of ARM or MIPS based port would be both good
and very practical?  Putting a lot of effort into i386 for more than a few
more years is going to be a dead end and feels like misplacing resources
that could be better applied towards pushing the system forward in other
dimensions.  So I'm for the idea of setting a sunset date for i386, for
what it's worth (which is approximately nothing :-)).

        - Dan C.