Hi, On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 08:49:34PM -0500, R. Steven Rainwater wrote:
> I think the reason there are not more programmers inclined to work on > the Hurd or, more importantly to me, the GNU OS, is because there are > no releases. The general perception in the outside world is that it's > dead. I fully agree. > I think a release of the GNU OS, with any kernel: Hurd, Linux, even a > BSD kernel, would generate increased interest in the GNU OS and Hurd > and cause more programmers to be inclined to work on it. That's where I disagree. I don't see how releasing a Linux-based system should generate more interest in the Hurd. > No one expects early releases of an OS or a kernel to be production > ready. What if Linux distros were not released until they were > prefected? Fedora Core 1 sucked badly. Fedora Core 2 sucked less. The > Fedora 7 running on my laptop today is mostly very nice but still > sucks in a few areas. By making regular releases, though, there is a > pereception that Fedora is always improving and a perception that it's > an active project I might want to participate in. Again, I fully agree. > Imagine if RedHat had said, "There's no point in releasing Fedora Core > 1. Let's keep working on it until it's better than Ubuntu and then > release it." Actually, Fedora Core is older than Ubuntu... But being based on Debian, Ubuntu was better in most regards from the very first release :-) > That would be silly. The problem is all those Linux distros are going > to keep making releases and keep getting better. I think the longer we > wait to release a GNU OS, the further behind we fall. Let's just jump > out there and start competing! Fully agree... > A GNU OS version 1 (or 0.1 or 0.01) is going to suck no matter what > kernel we put in it, but at least we'll have made a start. And once > people see that, I think it will bring lots of new people to help and > the rate of improvement will increase. Well, GNU 0.2 and Hurd 0.2 were released some ten years ago. The Hurd reports 0.3 as it's version number for a long time; just nobody cared to actually make the release... Otherwise, I agree again... Only that you are drawing exactly the wrong conclusion: If a first new release will suck no matter what kernel it uses, there is even less point not to use the proper kernel -- the Hurd -- from the beginning. Regarding releases, you have written all the things I feel very strongly myself, just am not able to put into words. Thank you for that. It's only the "let's start with Linux" part I don't see the point of. The Hurd is far from being perfect, but that doesn't hinder development of GNU; that's not a reason not to release with the Hurd as kernel. > Reading about the history of the The GNU OS reminds me of a Doctor Who > episode. It's been years since I saw it so I may have the story a > little out of whack but it went something like this... > > A spaceliner became lost and crashed on an unpopulated planet. The > surivors decided they must repair their spacecraft, launch it, and > achieve their freedom. So they started working on the ship. When the > doctor arrived on the planet, he discovered that generation upon > generation of the descendents of the original crash survivors had > worked on the spacecraft for thousands of years, trying to get it to > the point it was ready to launch. > > As he watched them work, the doctor realized the engineers had > replaced the idea of repairing the ship with the idea of perfecting > the ship. It had been able to launch and leave the planet for a long > time. But as long as the engineers saw any imperfection in its design, > they kept everyone in dark and forced them to keep working on it, > until the great day in distant future when they would launch the > perfect spaceship. The doctor, of course, revealed the truth to the > people. They overthrew the engineers and launched the ship. Nice parable -- it fits frighteningly well :-) (Especially regarding the "let's wait for a new microkernel" mindset discussed in the previous thread...) -antrik-
