I feel it's important to get "1.0" out there to draw a line in the sand, that we're at least "1.0" quality. We can do what MS-DOS could do. Maybe we have a few bugs, but (and maybe this is a sad fact) what "1.0" software doesn't have bugs? People expect it. But marking a "1.0" release means you can start to work on stuff after "1.0". For example: I really want to extend what capabilities you have available in DOS.
-jh Blair Campbell wrote: > Much 1.0 software is released with known bugs. We never said that > FreeDOS 1.0 would be bug free. > > On 8/18/06, Markus Laire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On 8/18/06, Eric Auer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> You probably know that MS DOS 1.0 did not even >>> support subdirectories... ;-). While FreeDOS 1.0 >>> is delayed because we keep adding features to our >>> wishlist. Some of which are beyond MS DOS 6.xx! >>> >> I wasn't really thinking MS DOS 1.0, but the attitude that "1.0" >> version is a bug-free version which doesn't have any known bugs and >> preferably not even unknown ones. >> -- This email message has been encrypted using the ROT-26 cipher. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
