>What the hell are you talking about? > >Is Bruno G. Albuquerque the idiot that made this 'release' public >knowledge on BeBits? Nothing has been released yet and nor *SHOULD* it >be. Last I checked there has been no testing and verification of the >entire tree, and yet someone has the gaul to release it to the >public?! If you look at the Programming Teams Status review everything >is in pre-alpha. Nothing should be released to the public until everything >is at least beta. The last thing we should be doing is releasing buggy >code. > >What the #$%^? > > >. * * * . \|/ * * , . * ' * . >. . * , * --*-- . ` * , . * , . >David Sowsy . /|\ BeOS Rebel and Coder . * . >http://dsowsy.nanorevolution.com . * . * . . If BeOS was a live project I would agree with you, but since Be is dead and there really isn't much movement from the commercial side I believe that the release of this patch (microrelease) ,buggy as it is, was a good move. I, for one, was starting to be tired of the Team Status always being on the same state, when clearly there has been some extra progress. I would blame those who have left the status of the Preferences to Planning!!!! I saw code there that doesn't show on the Status bars. And in any way, there is a uninstall option in the patch that brings the system back. I only saw one case in the bug database where failure to boot was a problem after installation (and that is to be expected by even a Beta version). And something a little out of topic. I would like to help with beta testing anything the OBOS has that is close to release (alpha or beta). I am a programmer my self, working on Delphi and VB - sorry, only basic C knowledge - but I have two PC's running BeOS 5 (an Athlon XP 1700+ running the 5 Pro edition -patched for the SSE problem-, and a Celleron 366 based mobile computer running the Personal edition, on a 4gb partition.)