At 07:09 �� 27/3/2002, you wrote: >Great stuff! Thanks to all who brought it about, not least of all TT >himself! At last the mysteries unveiled and we'll be in control of our own >destiny. This could be a new beginning - or the way to dusty death. Only >time will tell.
Yes, the main benefit of opening up the sources would be the ability to understand how SMS does the things it does, which may or may not lead to an ability to at last write drivers for devices we couldn't before... >The nitty-gritty of the license agreement has to be clarified. I cant >imagine that its purpose was to be obstructive in any way to legitimate >development. The intention must be to avoid turning SMSQ/E into > >1) a mess >2) a goldmine for the undeserving >3) Linux/E >4) WinDOS >5) Qdos a la DP (they figured Qdos wasnt entirely "compatible" (!) (and it >shows)) Hehe... Yes.. one of the major benefits of SMSQ/E against both Linux and Windows is that it is very concise... although for several programs out there to run, extensions are needed, this is far from the bloat both Windows (and unfortunately Linux) impose on you in order to run one simple application.. (Now if someone tells me that you can put Linux on one disk or even less... i'll respond... yes and try to run the GiMP on it! :-) (Nuff said!)... ProWesS for example can fit in under 3 Mb's (two disks) and can actually run on one... Take that Windows! Not even Win 286 could do that (4 x 1.2Mb disks iirc) >IMHO the OS should be kept lean and mean, and not be bloated with >everyone's pet add-ons, a la Windoze. It should be the kernel of what is >required to run systems utilities, extensions and programs across a variety >of different platforms. Thus PI should be in, but why Wman? Things should be >in, but why Hotkeys? If these non-essential add-ons, and others yet to be >written, were kept separate, each author could decide on his own policy of >distribution to fit the case (and users whether they wanted them). System >utilities and extensions that are generally useful across platforms and fall >in with the general ethos and style could be kept together with, but >separate from the SMSQ/E source tree. True but I do believe that you can still include a fully functional gui AND utilities AND "APIs" all included in a concise and tight code base... >Platform-specific developers would see to it that SMSQ/E would load and run >on their platform. Utilities to exploit specifics of that platform should be >included only for that platform (as an SMSQ module) while basic tests for >those facilities should be available for all platforms to make application >developer's lives easier. Eg, the likes of MACHINE, PROCESSOR, >HOSTOS, EMULATOR and DISP_TYPE (and their >m/c equivalents) should be available across ALL SMSQ/E and Qdos-like systems >so that application programs can take necessary action without having to >peek and poke around the system variables and Thing lists. > >There are certain core functions that would benefit all platforms, eg >slaving and the native file system, as well as some of the discussed >improvements to PI and many more. But whos going to handle those, as they >wont necessarily promote anyone's pet platform? (I hope Marcel hasnt lost >heart after that nasty little attack the other day.) I do believe that a sensible discussion on what should and what shouldn't be included in v.3 of SMSQ/E must be conducted as well as a reflection on what the route to the future should be... (Maybe the PowerPC??? ;-) Many things NEED to be changed like for example the archaic file system must give way to a POSIX type one either by a direct replacement or by a third-party extension (kinda like Thierry's CD driver), but in any case two of the MOST pressing changes for the platform would be the incorporation of a set of strong graphics capabilities (steps towards which have been taken with the introduction of the colour drivers.... maybe a software blitter or Wolfgang's scrolling extensions are good candidates too) and the replacement of the IO mechanism with one allowing the easier development of drivers for devices block or otherwise.... >And that leads me on to my last point, which is that there are a lot of >petty jealousies and tensions in our tiny (but dynamic!) backwater of the >world which if left unchecked will lead to no end of mischief and could >endanger the whole project. I suggest the list-moderator take culprits, who >are rude, hurl abuse, throw tantrums and slam doors, or make >unsubstantiated accusations, severely to task. A second offence should >lead to immediate suspension or worse, depending on the gravity of the >offence. This business is not only technical and social, it is very >important to a lot of us and we should guard it vigilantly! I totally agree and for an extra reason (see previous -not-so-nice- emails by yours truly) True to this and for my part (and my disagreement with Richard) I am happy to say that's all in the past now... explanations exchanged and the required words said and all is well :-) >Per > > > > >--- >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. �� ����������� ������ ����� >�������� ���. >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.343 / Virus Database: 190 - Release Date: 22/3/2002
