Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.0 relase, was MS-DOS image
Michael Devore escreveu: Yeah, but if you release what is perceived by more than a few percentage of users as a failed install or operation, FreeDOS could require significant damage control. And give more credibility to a few vultures who will over-hype FD problems for their own purposes, though that's probably a given at this point regardless of what's done. The negatives may be muted with a bit more time to test and to allow the 1.0-announce influx of bug reports to clear. I fully agree with Michael: - instalation shoulb be reasonably smooth (I am not following this) - incompatiblilities should be minimal (this is almost good so far) - features for the modern world are important, mainly FAT32 and LFN But I don't like the idea of a hyperbolic approach to 1.0 either. There must be a middle path, and I think it can be done without going through the full-blown transitional alpha-1, beta-1, beta-2, RC-1, RC-2, etc. business. That is a point too... As soon as FreeDOS 1.0 is out, it will get installed in a lot of machines, if people feel that there is support and new bug fix releases shortly after, it can also be interpred as positive ;-) Ah! does anyone know how to make a new FreeDOS realease for DOSEMU in .rpm format? Alain PS: I am allways amazed by Michael's debugging like this one about QB40... This one was even more complex than the C=00 for some Borland programs !!! End of the month must look awful tempting to get official 1.0 release declared a done deal and in distribution. I'm just saying maybe that's not such a great idea depending on what transpires over the next couple of weeks, though I'm not personally averse to the idea if next candidate release goes well on all fronts. An official 1.0 full release before Aug 31st sounds ideal -- I'm not saying it shouldn't happen, just that it shouldn't be required to happen. For my part, I'm going to try and get a HIMEM with the buggy BIOS workaround per Tom's feedback, and minor miscellany on HIMEM and EMM836, out by Sunday. - Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel - Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
[Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.0 relase, was MS-DOS image
At 01:08 PM 8/18/2006 -0500, you wrote: I feel it's important to get 1.0 out there to draw a line in the sand, that we're at least 1.0 quality. We can do what MS-DOS could do. Maybe we have a few bugs, but (and maybe this is a sad fact) what 1.0 software doesn't have bugs? People expect it. But marking a 1.0 release means you can start to work on stuff after 1.0. For example: I really want to extend what capabilities you have available in DOS. I've rethought my own idea on this a little bit. Take it for what it's worth. The 1.0 release announcement motivated a lot of people to test things at lot harder, or maybe just a lot more people tested it at all, or a combination of the two. The net result is the same; I personally have more support/feature requests and bug reports than I've had in aggregate for the past couple of years. All of them squashed together in the last month. I don't think I'm alone in that, the kernel looks to be under heavy update for one. And new install issues continue to be posted by new members. To be honest, I didn't anticipate the level of increase relative to the 1.0 announcement. Even the list subscriber counts appear to be up. But now we're running up against the deadline. I don't have time to stick everything in HIMEM/EMM386 that people want (apparently with pathological consequences), and I have to carefully weigh all changes against the possibility that they'll break something for someone somewhere. Surely I'm not alone in that situation. Maybe the release deadline needs little extra flexibility. Not like it was before. Oh, please, pretty please, not that. Just something like it's coming out, but right now we're clearing the flood of new reports from the initial 1.0 release announcement to ensure a quality experience. And as soon as bug reports die down -- not to the SAME level, but to a SANE level -- then a bit more testing of the final image and we're good to go. Basically, what I'm asking for, and I can't believe I'm doing it, is for a bit more time to pass, keeping the release based on feedback levels and with an eye on a firm release date in a timely fashion. Your original announcement of a month should have worked fine where FreeDOS was when you made it, but the act of the announcing changed all that. - Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.0 relase, was MS-DOS image
Michael Devore wrote: At 01:08 PM 8/18/2006 -0500, you wrote: I feel it's important to get 1.0 out there to draw a line in the sand, that we're at least 1.0 quality. We can do what MS-DOS could do. Maybe we have a few bugs, but (and maybe this is a sad fact) what 1.0 software doesn't have bugs? People expect it. But marking a 1.0 release means you can start to work on stuff after 1.0. For example: I really want to extend what capabilities you have available in DOS. I've rethought my own idea on this a little bit. Take it for what it's worth. The 1.0 release announcement motivated a lot of people to test things at lot harder, or maybe just a lot more people tested it at all, or a combination of the two. The net result is the same; I personally have more support/feature requests and bug reports than I've had in aggregate for the past couple of years. All of them squashed together in the last month. [...] Maybe the release deadline needs little extra flexibility. Not like it was before. Oh, please, pretty please, not that. Just something like it's coming out, but right now we're clearing the flood of new reports from the initial 1.0 release announcement to ensure a quality experience. And as soon as bug reports die down -- not to the SAME level, but to a SANE level -- then a bit more testing of the final image and we're good to go. Basically, what I'm asking for, and I can't believe I'm doing it, is for a bit more time to pass, keeping the release based on feedback levels and with an eye on a firm release date in a timely fashion. Your original announcement of a month should have worked fine where FreeDOS was when you made it, but the act of the announcing changed all that. Okay. What do we think we're looking at here for us to be ready for our 1.0 debug? Another month? Two months? Or is it more like weeks? -jh -- This email message has been encrypted using the ROT-26 cipher. - Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.0 relase, was MS-DOS image
At 02:01 PM 8/18/2006 -0500, Jim Hall wrote: Basically, what I'm asking for, and I can't believe I'm doing it, is for a bit more time to pass, keeping the release based on feedback levels and with an eye on a firm release date in a timely fashion. Your original announcement of a month should have worked fine where FreeDOS was when you made it, but the act of the announcing changed all that. Okay. What do we think we're looking at here for us to be ready for our 1.0 debug? Another month? Two months? Or is it more like weeks? Personally? I want another week to clear my schedule of incoming (and hope there isn't a lot more) plus monitoring, and another week after that for follow-up. Currently I feel like I should get a release out the door today, and frankly I'd like more time than that. Then, maybe a couple weeks of full FreeDOS 1.0 test? I don't know, what do other open source people usually leave golden release candidates at as a test window? Others involved in major open source projects would have a much better idea and more education on the topic than me. Your question could use input from the developer roster of folks here, because I don't know their status, other than what I see about the kernel and installation. Anybody else out there in a development/support time crunch? If it's just me, then maybe a short week will do it if no major complications. - Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.0 relase, was MS-DOS image
Michael Devore escreveu: Personally? I want another week to clear my schedule of incoming (and hope there isn't a lot more) plus monitoring, and another week after that for follow-up. Currently I feel like I should get a release out the door today, and frankly I'd like more time than that. Then, maybe a couple weeks of full FreeDOS 1.0 test? May I offer a suggestion: we can have FreeDOS 1.0 alfa FreeDOS 1.0 beta 1 FreeDOS 1.0 beta 2 That would keep the schedule *and* allow time to test... Alain - Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.0 relase, was MS-DOS image
Alain M. wrote: Michael Devore escreveu: Personally? I want another week to clear my schedule of incoming (and hope there isn't a lot more) plus monitoring, and another week after that for follow-up. Currently I feel like I should get a release out the door today, and frankly I'd like more time than that. Then, maybe a couple weeks of full FreeDOS 1.0 test? May I offer a suggestion: we can have FreeDOS 1.0 alfa FreeDOS 1.0 beta 1 FreeDOS 1.0 beta 2 That would keep the schedule *and* allow time to test... Alain Boy, it seems like 1.0 is a perfection that no one can achieve around here. We have 1.0pre-1, 1.0pre-2, etc. It seems like it's more like 0.9, 0.99, 0.999, 0., etc., getting closer to 1 without actually achieving it. Gregory - Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.0 relase, was MS-DOS image
At 09:00 PM 8/18/2006 -0400, Gregory Pietsch wrote: Alain M. wrote: May I offer a suggestion: we can have FreeDOS 1.0 alfa FreeDOS 1.0 beta 1 FreeDOS 1.0 beta 2 That would keep the schedule *and* allow time to test... Boy, it seems like 1.0 is a perfection that no one can achieve around here. We have 1.0pre-1, 1.0pre-2, etc. It seems like it's more like 0.9, 0.99, 0.999, 0., etc., getting closer to 1 without actually achieving it. Yeah, but if you release what is perceived by more than a few percentage of users as a failed install or operation, FreeDOS could require significant damage control. And give more credibility to a few vultures who will over-hype FD problems for their own purposes, though that's probably a given at this point regardless of what's done. The negatives may be muted with a bit more time to test and to allow the 1.0-announce influx of bug reports to clear. But I don't like the idea of a hyperbolic approach to 1.0 either. There must be a middle path, and I think it can be done without going through the full-blown transitional alpha-1, beta-1, beta-2, RC-1, RC-2, etc. business. End of the month must look awful tempting to get official 1.0 release declared a done deal and in distribution. I'm just saying maybe that's not such a great idea depending on what transpires over the next couple of weeks, though I'm not personally averse to the idea if next candidate release goes well on all fronts. An official 1.0 full release before Aug 31st sounds ideal -- I'm not saying it shouldn't happen, just that it shouldn't be required to happen. For my part, I'm going to try and get a HIMEM with the buggy BIOS workaround per Tom's feedback, and minor miscellany on HIMEM and EMM836, out by Sunday. - Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
