2010/12/7 Achim Hasenmüller <[email protected]>: > Geoff, > 4.0 is a major release with improvements everywhere. I don't think it brings > fewer changes than 3.2, in terms of LOCs changed it might be even bigger. We > have made significant improvements to the API (all based on feedback from > developers) and the hypervisor. It's true that we've put more focus on GUI > and usability this time, mainly because we've neglected that area for too > long while were were busy with other things. With 3.2, we went into > production with very large and very multithreaded systems (thousands of VMs > on very big machines) and this revealed several very hard to find race > conditions. As part of that, we have introduced a lock validator (amazing > technology in itself) so these issues are covered now. > BTW, this extension pack architecture in 4.0 is quite amazing, that was a > major effort and it actually means a fundamental change of architecture. No > more OSE vs PUEL just VirtualBox (100% OSS) + optional PUEL extension pack > and possibly more 3rd party extension packs.
does it also means that e.g. all builded rpms in http://download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/4.0.0_BETA1/ are pure OSS ? I asked because license is still marked as PUEL rpm -qp --qf="%{LICENSE}\n" VirtualBox-4.0-4.0.0_BETA1_68572_openSUSE113-1.x86_64.rpm VirtualBox Personal Use and Evaluation License (PUEL) thanks > We are hoping for active beta participation so that we can incorporate a lot > of feedback and do a good 4.0 release. Of course, 3.2 will remain in active > maintenance for quite a while. > Achim > On Dec 7, 2010, at 00:55 , Geoff Nordli wrote: > > I am trying to make a decision is we should start porting our app over to > 4.0 from the 3.2 series > > 3.2 debuted June 2009, and we are looking at an 18 month dev cycle to a > production grade release. It seems there was a lot of core functionality > delivered during the 3.2 series, which takes a lot longer to bake. > > When I look at the feature set on 4.0, I don’t see the same level core > changes. It seems to be more focused on fixing some of the usability issues > (like media management). I would expect this version to stabilize a lot > sooner than the 3.2 series. > > Do you agree? > > Thanks, > > Geoff > > > _______________________________________________ > vbox-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://vbox.innotek.de/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev > > _______________________________________________ vbox-dev mailing list [email protected] http://vbox.innotek.de/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev
