Ognyan Kulev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Marco Gerards wrote: > > Anyway, I hope to start a discussion with this email. It would be > > nice if the Hurd maintainers would make it clear what needs to be done > > before the Hurd 0.3 can be released or if they just release it. > > Yes, I think the most important thing now is to clearly set what are > the requirements for 0.3. > http://hurd.gnufans.org/bin/view/Hurd/GNUHurdStatus should be > considered. > > My personal opinion is that 0.3 should include the ext2fs patch and > I'm even optimist that all issues about the patch can be cleared till > FOSDEM. I agree. > I'm under impression that DHCP is important too. I also agree.
> Buggy software gives bad impression and I think we should at least > mark the bad things. For example, we can have message in the > beginning of INSTALL-cross that it's largely outdated, and rpctrace > can always print message to stderr that it's unusable for serious work > (e.g. debian packaging). These "marks" are easy when we have complete > list of what doesn't work right. I don't see the point in this. Adding features for to report buggy software is more work then we need. The point here is just to have a release to show the project is still going. With a version like 0.X a newbie or guru would logically realize the software is not going to be full proof or for that matter finished. IMHO hde _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
