On 3/5/07, Mikhail Loenko wrote:
<SNIP> > >>>>> Since currently the most stable platform is Windows/IA32 I suggest > >>>>> that Harmony Q2 will be released on that specific platform > >>>> > >>>> you mean, we have no time for 2 platforms? > >>> > >>> I mean we should IMHO make a focus: have superb results on a single > >>> platform on a limited set of applications rather than have million > >>> somehow working scenarios > >>> on a dozen of platforms. > >> > >> Does it make sense? > > > > I think, limiting ourselves for the next milestone is a good > > idea. Though, IMHO, limiting ourseles to windows is more of a > > limitation than of making us focused. It does not take much effort to > > support Linux with te same priority of bugfixing (if scenarious are > > pretty automated), but lets people be sure that we are not to break > > their work in favour to support windows faster. > > > > There may be a hybrid strategy: improve on windows, do not break > > anything on Linux, seems pretty acceptable to me. > > I have zero interest in exclusively working on Windows. None. Zip. > Zero. Nada. > > Linux is a peer distro for this project. It always has been. > > To be an open source project that only distributes software for > closed source ecosystems like Windows is the sort of irony I'd prefer > not to be associated with :) Nobody is talking about being a project for Windows only. The idea is going deep first and extend in deapth next. If we try to have everything before we have something we will have nothing: if we try to have presense on each platform before we are solid on at least one platform we will lose: for each platform there always be "another" implementation that is better. Instead we should stick to some specific platform, make it solid and then extend
I don't see a big issue here to ague about - my impression is that most of the issues currently we have are OS-independent. Why not focus on architecture rather then OS? We've already implementation for Windows/Linux. I've heard that Windows implementation a bit more optimized (VM guys please correct me if I'm wrong). But is it really doesn't matter, IMHO, they both are quite solid. And I think that improving both of them won't double required efforts (compared to improving implementation for one selected OS). Let's say that x86 (Windows/Linux) is our primary focus. And next goal is to be solid on x86-64 architecture. Thanks, Stepan Mishura Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division
