Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> 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.
>   
That depends a bit on the feature set that is required for a 1.0
release. If we select platforms that are completely supported (say, ARM7
and XScale?), and get the configuration management to a state where the
user only needs to tweak a supplied config file a bit for his board, I
think this could be called 1.0 - a 1.0 release does not need to support
every device in the world. I think it is just a matter of taste where we
draw the line of what needs to be stable for a release.

However, having a stable config file syntax that does not change shortly
after 1.0 would be good for users.
> 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 :-)
>   
Fine with me.
Now if the development speed stays the same, I do think we should be
able to reach something that can be called 1.0 during this year.

cu
Michael

_______________________________________________
Openocd-development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development

Reply via email to