--- Helmar Rudolph <helmar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > [snip] ...you will surely piss off more > developers when BeOS has gained more support than it has > now. Now it's at the bottom, so it's opportune to do it. > Again, this is from a marketing angle, not a development > angle. > > The problem is that if you do it later, it is _us_ who sit > there with the problem of annoyed developers. _us_ in > anyone wanting to market the [x]BeOS. If you don't have > such plans with OpenBeOS, then good luck. ;) > [snip] Be careful not to underestimate [*]BeOS developers. They (I'd say we but I've never created anything that anyone's seen besides myself :) are here for the cutting edge OS/API, among many other reasons. I think they can handle a little recompile later on (R2?) for their OS of choice; especially if the recompile is getting them some wicked cool new feature that no other OS has. B] One of the primary strengths the project right now is focus. Focus on recreating R5 as closely as possible. Part of that focus is on attempting application-level binary compatibility. It's currently one of the larger things binding this project together. I think that most people here agree that, for the time being, having this focus is more important than trying to avoid possible future developer discontent down the road. ---j __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals. http://personals.yahoo.com