Yeah, possibly. I won't comment on this, because I don't fully
understand all of the Hurd yet either. I think we should look
forward, but we should be doing a cost-benefit analysis at the
same time and base some of our decisions off of it. I can't speak
for Alfred, but I think that's what he really wants. I think Alfred
wishes to remain practical. Not that I think anyone else here is
impractical, but I think a cost-benefit analysis is a practical way
to determine if the project can be done in a reasonable amount of
time with whatever goals we decide.
Well put.
It would suck if they decided not to cooperate. In that case,
though, why can't we fork the code into a GNU project? Those
projects, AFAIK, are open source. I know this sounds like overhead
we don't want, but we already have GNU Mach, which is already
maintained by GNU.
Please note that the GNU project isn't open source, it is free
software.
As for forking, I don't mind that. It will cause less headaches
sometimes.
_______________________________________________
L4-hurd mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
