FreeBSD Foundation Passes '04 Small Donation Needs 84
MTS writes "Thanks to the generous contributions of over 800 donors, a combination of both first-time donors and existing supportors, the FreeBSD Foundation has met and exceeded its fund-raising goal necessary to qualify for the 1/3 'public support' goal required to maintain its 501(c)3 status with the IRS. Your continued donations will help to support a broad variety of FreeBSD activities, including critical development, developer collaboration, testing, and involvement in standards processes." Convoluted tax laws meant that FreeBSD's success in attracting larger donations had threatened the organization's tax-free status.
Official statement URL (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Heh (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't complain about open source, go complain about governments making it so hard to MAKE anything for free.
Re:Heh (Score:5, Insightful)
Open Source just means that you can easily view the source code and generally possibly to modify it.
If you want to talk about ideas, you should talk about different groups and the like, but not generalize like that.
Re:Heh (Score:2, Interesting)
The only way to survive, to not be driven out of business, to not be bought, is not to try to compete on their terms, not to be for sale and not to be a business.
Re:Heh (Score:5, Insightful)
The is one thing that I believe makes the BSD license a beautiful thing. The same code, created under the same license, can be freely reused in something totally open (such as Linux), partly open (such as Mac OS X), or totally closed (such as Windows XP.) Communist? Hardly.
Re:Heh (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Heh (Score:3, Insightful)
That is, essentially, lots of private individuals are contributing -- not for profit -- to a privately-organized collection of code which is re-released back to the public under a set of rules (defined in the license) by a private entity's terms.
In essence, nearly the entire operation is privately-run. Is there an exchange of money for software? No.
But the software is developed mostly pri
More about the "quota"? (Score:5, Insightful)
None the less, woohoo for the foundation, help make FreeBSD 6.0 even better
Re:More about the "quota"? (Score:2)
IANA tax lawyer, but I believe the "public support" test needs to be met each year on the basis of the totals for the preceeding 48 months.
Re:More about the "quota"? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:More about the "quota"? (Score:4, Interesting)
His SUSE 'review' [osnews.com] His FreeBSD 'review' [osnews.com]
Some gems (pun intended) from the latter:
The bold parts are hyperlins to articles that supposed to show how "slow" AMD64 under FreeBSD 5.3 is supposed to be does in no way even mention FreeBSD and in fact only tests SuSE and Fedora Core along with Windows XP SP1. Same with 'completeness'. On the other hand, I remember his amd64 review of FreeBSD 5.2.1 - which was an excellent and well detailed review. I guess he didn't even try FreeBSD on amd64 since then.And don't even start me on his 'new feature list'. Forgets to mention important things like backports of many features of ULE to SCHED_4BSD, inclusion of pf and altq framwork in the base system (for sysadmins, this is perhaps one of the most important features), multithreaded network stack (although he mentions it elsewhere, but not under new features!), etc. He is even wrong in his pathetic attempt at humour (if it was that) about the naming of ULE:
Well, yes, ULE might not be an acronym, and no, its name is not SCHED_ULEI would take this guy's comments with a grain of salt, except for his older work, which I think was excellent (I don't have problems with criticism, and his old amd64 review was quite critical. I have problems with FUD and unsubstantiated claims and badly written articles). What happened to this guy?
Re:More about the "quota"? (Score:1)
Re:More about the "quota"? (Score:3, Informative)
I can attest that it has been working in 5.3-STABLE for over a month on my ASUS A7V880 board.
Re:More about the "quota"? (Score:5, Informative)
To become a publicly supported organization, a charity must show that it enjoys broad support from the general public, as opposed to having its funding concentrated in a small number of donors. One of the publicly supported organizations tests requires that 1/3 of the organization's funding come from individuals, corporate and foundation grants, and other public charities, and amounts from any one source (except other public charities or the government) in excess of two percent of the organization's total support do not count for these purposes. This 1/3 test is performed each year, but is based on the average received over the previous four years.
If an organization cannot meet the 1/3 test, it may still qualify as a publicly supported charity so long as its "good" support (grants and contributions that pass through the two-percent filter) amount to more than ten percent of its total revenue and it can show that it is engaged in a continuous fundraising program, has a board representative of the community, and satisfies other factors. The BSD Foundation appeared to have been on the verge of falling just shy of the 1/3 test, but probably would have had little difficulty satisfying the alternate 10-percent-plus-facts-and-circumstances test and therefore probably would have remained a publicly supported charity even without its recent plea for donations. Nonetheless, every new Section 501(c)(3) organization is given a five-year test period in which to attempt to meet either test, and at the end of that period must send in a worksheet to the IRS showing how it did, which means that some official in the IRS actually will take a look at the foundation's public charity status.
All publicly supported Section 501(c)(3) organizations must complete a schedule on their annual tax returns (Form 990) that demonstrates their on-going compliance with the public support test. Interestingly enough, though, the IRS simply does not seem to have the computer or personnel resources to do anything about an organization that files a 990 disclosing that it has unquestionably failed the public support test, and there are many charities that have survived the initial five-year probationary period, that have subsequently filed 990's showing that their public support is well below even the minimum 10 percent, and yet that remain classified by the IRS as a publicly supported charity, and not a private foundation.
Re:FreeBSD is Dying (Score:1, Insightful)
Microsoft:
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/ d ocumentation/W indowsServ/2003/standard/proddocs/en-us/Default.as p?url=/resources/documentation/WindowsServ/2003/st andard/proddocs/en-us/copyright.asp
Apple (OS X)
Sun (SunOS)
Nokeia (check point)
Juniper Routers (JunOS)
Linux
Yep, all is dead in the world of BSD. Well... with all of those folks using BSD then how can it be dying? Must not be true... Ahhh... you must be a cluess tro
Re:FreeBSD (Score:1, Insightful)
Pretty much, and he/she/it's a big one, considered what Netcraft actually says. [netcraft.com] ;)
Oh, and btw: Netcraft runs on FreeBSD servers! [netcraft.com]
47$ Donations (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:47$ Donations (Score:2)
I support FreeBSD with subscriptions (Score:5, Informative)
While the funding drives are helpful, it's important to give the team a more substantive commitment and ongoing revenue they can bank on. It's a small price to pay. Subscribe [freebsdmall.com] and make a difference!
Re:I support FreeBSD with subscriptions (Score:2)
Re:I support FreeBSD with subscriptions (Score:2)
You subscribed to FreeBSDMall.
They donate part of your subscription fees to FreeBSD Foundation and from state's point of view FreeBSDMall contribute money, not subscribers...
Re:Not that it is going to apply (Score:2, Insightful)
Requiem for the FUD (Score:3, Informative)
FreeBSD:
FreeBSD, Stealth-Growth Open Source Project (Jun 2004) [internetnews.com]
"FreeBSD has dramatically increased its market penetration over the last year."
Nearly 2.5 Million Active Sites running FreeBSD (Jun 2004) [netcraft.com]
"[FreeBSD] has a secured a strong foothold with the hosting community and continues to grow, gaining over a million hostnames and half a million active sites since July 2003."
What's New in the FreeBSD Network Stack (Sep 2004) [slashdot.org]
"FreeBSD can now route 1Mpps on a 2.8GHz Xeon whilst Linux can't do much more than 100kpps."
NetBSD:
NetBSD sets Internet2 Land Speed World Record (May 2004) [slashdot.org]
NetBSD again sets Internet2 Land Speed World Record (30 Sep 2004) [netbsd.org]
OpenBSD:
OpenBSD Widens Its Scope (Nov 2004) [eweek.com]
Review: OpenBSD 3.6 shows steady improvement (Nov 2004) [newsforge.com]
*BSD in general:
..and last but not least, we have the cutest mascot as well - undisputedly. ;) [keltia.net]
Deep study: The world's safest computing environment (Nov 2004) [mi2g.com]
"The world's safest and most secure 24/7 online computing environment - operating system plus applications - is proving to be the Open Source platform of BSD (Berkeley Software Distribution) and the Mac OS X based on Darwin."
Same old FUD... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Lessons from the Ashes (Score:1, Interesting)
http://bsd.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=131 1 09&cid =10951312
The orginally story is from 1994. Dont forget that ext2 was based on BSD FFS. And ofcourse that since its 10 years old, no mention of softupdates or FFS2.
So, I guess that there is plenty of innovation happening in the BSD Labs. O'wait, don't forget the porting of XFS and someother file systems to *BSD.
Yes, yes, there are plenty of good files systems out there and the *BSD's take the cream of the c
Re:Fuckin' morons! Support D-fly! FreeBSD IS DEAD! (Score:2)
At this rate give them a month or two to get something usable in, at the most. Brilliant developers.
Re:Fuckin' morons! Support D-fly! FreeBSD IS DEAD! (Score:5, Funny)
I donated $20 (Score:2, Informative)
While I feel good that I helped a little I kinda feel a little bad I've never done anything else before!!!
Re:I donated $68 (Score:1)
Cheers & a happy new year, fellowes
Re:Dispelling some more FUD (Score:1)
That one by Oppermann was a mailing list post, in which he was implicitly referring to a Xeon. Not surprisingly, the submitter of the
"Andre claims that FreeBSD can now route 1Mpps on a 2.8GHz Xeon whilst Linux can't do much more than 100kpps."
Notice the "on a 2.8GHz Xeon" part... *Both* the numbers (1 Mpps and "not much more than 100kpps") are referred to one particular architecture.
An