> They are not shut down, they are mostly ignored because we already have > not enough time to write code, let alone discuss things that were > decided long ago, and for many valid reasons. I think this somewhat understates the situation. Haiku is defined by a certain notion of continuing after BeOS. That doesn't mean that the course of action is set in stone to the last detail, but it is - an OS unto itself, not an API on top of some other OS - a single user desktop platform (at present) - a C++ API - multithreaded windowing system - talks to servers on message ports - etc. Are those bad ideas? Millions of people think they are, and the proof is Windows, Linux, MacOS ... etc., ad nauseum. All vastly more popular than BeOS or Haiku, if that proves anything. Fine. Is it interesting that they're bad ideas? NO. Developers have been quite indulgent lately on this list in discussion of such things, but no one should be surprised that the proposed solutions to the supposed problems are not adopted. If Haiku's defining principles are no good, then it may as well fold up and let people concentrate on learning the stinking MacOS API or whatever, but on the contrary plenty of people think the Haiku idea is plenty good enough and just want a released platform to work with. Don't get tangled up by the trolls. Donn