[rt-devel] Re: [rt-users] Code fork

[Thomas Sandlaß]

On Tue, 25 Jul 2000, Tobias Brox wrote:

> > 	I have to say that this saddens me quite a bit.
> 
> Me too.

And here's another sad one.

> > [..] It is thinking like that which gave us the abominations like
> Windows 98 and XEmacs ;)
> 
> Have you read "The cathedral and the baazar"?

Of course!

> The success of other beasts like Linux depends greatly on the user
> community.  For RT2, there is no user community.  My philosophy is
> that if a project actually is used, bugs will be weeded out quicker,
> and it will be quicker to spot what concepts is actually working and
> which one isn't.  The problem is that nobody (except Jesse and me) is
> interessted in hacking on RT2 unless they can set it to production
> today.

Appart from the fact that my personal opinion is that XEmacs is the better
branch I think with RT we could keep the same CVS repository. I mean are
there fundamental reasons to really split instead of making a branch,
and releasing it ASAP? This makes code transfers much easier than manual
merges. And looking ar the release numbers 1.0 and 2.0 I see lots of
empty space inbetween. Note that Linux also jumped to 0.93 or so to
indicate the approaching 1.0 final release. So how about 1.8---leaving
the step 1.9 as a last resort?

> > To quote RMS (gratuitously), I would rather use stable, well-thought-out,
> > "Done-right-the-first-time" GNU tools than the more feature-rich,

Do you know JWZ's article "worse is better"?

> > bug-full, downright scandalous offerings of those who want to ship their
> > product ASAP and let the user base debug it for them.

I see no problem if that is clearly marked as e.g. in the even/odd
numbering scheme of the Linux kernels.

> > If this is true, you should continue to hack on it together. 
> 
> That's not up to me anymore.

Sorry if I'm poking to much into the feelings of you and Jesse but
is everything settled? 

 
> > It is my
> > opinion that software is best produced slowly and deliberately, not by
> > piling ugly hack upon ugly hack.
> 
> I'm really prefering to improve a system that I can actually use, than to
> build on a system that will be ready some time in the future.  When using
> a product, you know a bit better what have to be done, why and how.

We should leave something to do for RT 3.0 :)

Regards, TSa.
-- 
+--------------------- Thomas Sandlaß, Orthogon GmbH ------------------+
|                   Vaihinger Str. 169, 70567 Stuttgart                |
|                   E-Mail: Thomas.Sandlass at orthogon.de                |
+--------- Tel: +49-711-78 19 60-26, Fax: +49-711-78 19 60-21 ---------+

ORTHOGON and ODS Toolbox are registered trademarks of Orthogon GmbH