Re: Zynot Short Term Roadmap

On Tue, 2003-07-08 at 06:42, Zach Welch wrote:
> If I had my way, all releases using Porteus would be considered
> developer releases; the new distribution will not be 1.0 worthy until we
> have a new package manager, built from spec from the ground up.  That
> notion might get me in trouble (by Jon, at least), so I'm also willing
> to consider making that Porteus 2.0 instead.

I had imagined the 1.x series of porteus to be python (ie: portage)
based and to serve as a testbed for ideas (not only new tree layouts,
but things like signed builds, etc). The 2.x series would then be the
re-write. However, I'm don't care about version schemes enough to demand
this, so if there's strong support for porteus based on python to be 0.x
and 1.0 be the first release of the c++ version, that's fine by me too.
as long as we decide now (ie: before LWESF), either way is acceptable.

I absolutely agree that we should not cut corners in order to have
something to show people at LWESF. That said, I think it's vital for us
to have something at LWESF. People need to see that we are going to
deliver a professional distribution with real QA. Even if we don't hand
out CDs, we need to have demos that highlight the differences that set
us apart from other distributions. I think the feature set I outlined in
my mail yesterday re: porteus-0.5 will give people a good taste for
where we're going. I will be working hard to have that
functionality/documentation in place by LWESF.

nall.

_______________________________________________
Zynot-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.zynot.org/mailman/listinfo/zynot-dev

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQA/CsAt4DLJUYqFxU0RAmYwAJ0a1/6ukNVXK9uABKqdtCdktgGDMACghWrg
28bPtasoYEMcS7Bwp9fM42E=
=Gf05
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----