X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Message-ID: <4658.220.233.177.46.1150038924.squirrel@cafemail.mcadcafe.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 01:15:24 +1000 (EST)
Subject: Re: DJGPP 2.04 Status
From: decker AT dacafe DOT com
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
Importance: Normal
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hi Rich!

Hearing from you makes me miss the good old days :)

>> Well, I'm not entirely sure of that either. But I am totally not up to
>> speed on the real issues affecting (i.e preventing) a djgpp 2.04 release,
>> and no one has (of yet) been specific enough to bring them up here, now.
>> So I am somewhat confused.
>
> A couple of years has elapsed since the 2.04 beta release, so everyone's
> memory is probably a little fuzzy.
>
> There are some pretty specific issues on the status page. ;)
>
> http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~phekda/richdawe/djgpp/2.04/status204.html

Yeah, DJ already pointed me to that list which was a contributing factor
to my part in this thread. I guess what I mean is, I would like(and maybe
others) some reminders as to what people feel, of these many issues on the
list are *real* "show stoppers". Is it *everything* marked priority one,
for example? No one has commented directly on this yet.

If the issues are serious, then of course it can't be released as "final".
But if it will remain at beta for some time yet(years), then I don't see
the real-world sense of stopping the addition of new features (like elf or
nmalloc). A bit like saying "no we can't fix what we have right now, but
we can't take new features either".



> As far as I know, there is currently no release manager for DJGPP 2.04.

That is probably the biggest problem then. The whole thing isn't being
project managed properly anymore. That needs to be resolved before
anything then. You can't have a release without somone taking
responsibility for it.


> It seems to me there are two ways to get 2.04 out there:
> (1) Release 2.04 as-is.

Yeah. That would basically be our last resort 'bail out' descision.


> (2) Someone volunteers to be the release manager.

Well, you will need *that* either way you go. But if a *list* of "show
stoppers were agreed to, a call for voulunteers went out, maybe, just
maybe, something could get properly packaged for something...


There was one fella I had in mind, but he can't make the kind of
commitment that RM would need.

Sorry about that...

Regards,
Ben



-----------------------------------------
Stay ahead of the information curve.
Receive MCAD news and jobs on your desktop daily.
Subscribe today to the MCAD CafeNews newsletter.
[ http://www10.mcadcafe.com/nl/newsletter_subscribe.php ]
It's informative and essential.