[openbeos] Re: Ok, let's start

  • From: "Michael Phipps" <mphipps1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 13:43:00 -0400

>
>>So, let's start.
>
>Yes, let's.  I think we should look into aquiring/merging with the 
>openbeos.sourceforge.net space and seeding the source tree with Bruno G. 
>Albuquerque and Nathan Whitehorn's Mail Daemon Replacement, if they're 
>willing.  That'd be one server down, and a bunch more plus a kernel to 
>go. ;)

I will take care of getting sourceforge set up.

>If we can firmly establish the project as a true replacement for R5 with 
>a future ahead of it, we can probably coax the community to move to gcc 
>3.x.  If nothing else, we can do what Be wouldn't do and version the 
>libs.  Or even go with the good ideas you have here -- just later.  
>Getting up and running as quickly as possible should be our foremost 
>concern, otherwise the userbase and community might fade out on us.  
>Strike while the iron is hot and all that. =)

I 100% agree. That is why I really don't think that we should change any more
than we have to right now. I would rather have a working R5 replacement
that will run every app (to start with) than a new OS with a BeOS like design, 
no software and more ambitious/less stable. Let's get to R5/R6 level first.

>>* i think we should use the beos kernel approach, this means 
>independent modules 
>>   which are all loaded at boot time, and those who find hardware keep 
>loaded.
>>   You really don't want a single large kernel you need to constantly 
>recompile!
>
>I think we're talking about basically reimplementing the OS, so this is 
>probably a given.  If nothing else, this architecture is definitely one 
>of the cooler aspects of BeOS.

100% agreed. The replacability of the server/kit model is a big bonus.

>>Some legal things:
>[stuff re. GPL]
>
>As much as I admire what the GNU folks have accomplished, I find the, 
>uh, "enthusiasm" of their userbase a bit hard to take at times.  I'm in 
>favor of a more liberal license -- Mozilla, BSD, maybe OpenTracker; 
>something along those lines.

I was looking fondly at the MIT license.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. haiku
  3. Archive
  4. 08-2001