On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 8:36 AM, Michael Schwingen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Rick Altherr wrote: > > It's been a while since any talk about 1.0 has flown by on the list. > > My take on recent developments is that calling what we have today 1.0 > > is a bit of a stretch. The ToT codebase works on in a few > > interface/target combinations, but there are still lots of mysterious > > errors. My investigations into how to add Cortex-A8 support has led > > down a few thought experiments that would cause major changes to both > > the code base and to the configuration syntax. All of these things > > don't make the current ToT feel like a 1.0. Since the main intent of > > a versioned release is to provide an easy way for users to obtain and > > build a known version, we don't really need to have an extremely solid > > first release. I'd suggest that we clean up the current ToT and > > release a 0.1. That way, the various package maintainers can use a > > known version and hopefully users will focus on using 0.1 instead of > > battling with the current ToT and the bugs it has had introduced. > I think it feels more like at least 0.5, or even 0.9 - depending on > target. However, it is just a number, for me, any will do fine as long > as we *do* a release.
OpenOCD can *NEVER* be "1.0" in that there will always be a non-trivial effort required on the developers side to get things working. I'd say that 0.9 is as finished as a hardware debugger will ever be if it is to be anything like remotely current w.r.t. hardware out there. So, I vote for 0.7 :-) -- Øyvind Harboe http://www.zylin.com/zy1000.html ARM7 ARM9 XScale Cortex JTAG debugger and flash programmer _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
