HAMMER update 06-Feb-2008

walt wa1ter at myrealbox.com
Fri Feb 8 17:42:09 PST 2008

Matthew Dillon wrote:
:There's always the option of releasing a 1.12 version now (it's not like
:there haven't been enough changes to justify a new release). The 2.0 release
:is likely to get a lot of downloads, so I think shipping it with a pre-alpha
:hammer is a waste of an opportunity to attract more people. Not to mention
:that it's hard to put a time bound on this kind of development. So, let's
:just admit that and ship 2.0 as soon as Matt declares it ready for beta
:testing, regardless of what time of year it is. A real beta-state hammer
:justifies a 2.0 release on its own IMHO. Also, this will let Matt work on
:hammer without any tight deadlines.
     Yes, and I've agonized over this very possibility.  Maybe the thing
     to do is to poll the people on kernel at .  HAMMER won't be ready for
     sure (things take however long they take), but the hardest part of it
     is working and stable and I'm just down to garbage collection and
     crash recovery.  Crazily enough, that is what all the major surgery
     yesterday, and the continuing work, is about.
     So what do people think?  Should this month's release be 1.12 or 2.0 ?
I vote for 2.0rc1.  I've watched both Linus and BillG+UncleFester go through
many release cycles over the years, and I'd hate to see DragonFly duplicate
the Windows Vista debacle just to meet an arbitrary/imaginary deadline.
Bill has made billions by promising products he can't (and doesn't) deliver,
but those good-ole-days seem to be over now, thankfully!

More information about the Kernel mailing list