Re: Beta vs. Stable

my cents on this:

first, changing a products name (from beta to stable), doesn't
make it better or worse.
however, to reduces 'customer' frustration, I'd always call 
a product 'beta', unless probability is high, he will be satisfied.

probably the greatest obstacle here is the missing CHKDSK

implementing COUNTRY should be easy, but hasn't been done either.

for international ( non US or central european) users, 
codepage support (DISPLAY.SYS and friends).

RE spec:
a spec is a spec; nothing else - no dogma, no bible.
there is exactly one thing, that is really important, and should *never*
change

	'FreeDOS tries to be as plug-compatible to MSDOS as possible
	and will run as many MSDOS programs as possible'

the spec refers MASM. noone uses MASM 

the spec says MSDOS 3.x. FreeDOS *is* >= MSDOS 5.x, if there
are differences between 3.x and 5.x (mostly layout of internal data)

however, commandline switches should be as identical as reasonable.

	buffer=n,[m]
the second [,m] parameter is implemented, as required by the spec.
FreeDOS internal handling of buffers is completely different from MSDOS,
anyway.


> I am a person who believes that a specs is a tool to help you develop a 
> project, but it shouldn't be a constraint that, for the contrary, keeps 
> you out of what is really missing/interesting to be implemented.