From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17796 invoked by alias); 14 Dec 2007 16:34:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 17788 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Dec 2007 16:34:05 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from main.gmane.org (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (80.91.229.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:33:54 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1J3DTZ-0008DX-Mi for ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:33:25 +0000 Received: from c-76-17-159-23.hsd1.mn.comcast.net ([76.17.159.23]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:33:25 +0000 Received: from grante by c-76-17-159-23.hsd1.mn.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:33:25 +0000 To: ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com From: Grant Edwards Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 17:11:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <1197567366.3593.17.camel@lucretius.esaturnus.com> <476190B4.2050606@mindspring.com> <20071214104551.GD13033@lunn.ch> User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.1 (Linux) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: [ECOS] Re: Is eCos project still alive? X-SW-Source: 2007-12/txt/msg00090.txt.bz2 On 2007-12-14, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 05:38:02AM -0500, Chris Zimman wrote: >> Frank, >> >> I think you raise a valid point here. Perhaps it would be time to consider >> creating a more up to date release. >> Rather frequently on the list, someone will say something to the effect of >> 'I've downloaded/am using eCos 2.0 ...blah blah...it seems very out of >> date...' The traditional response has been 'Go pull the latest from CVS'. >> >> Thoughts anyone? > > It has been for a long time the aim to make a release once the > copyright transfer to FSF is completed. This has take much > much longer than we ever thought it would take. We are nearly > there, there is just one copyright assignment left, which is > taking a while to sort out. > > Once this is completed we will start the work needed for a > release. This is not something we can do overnight. It > involves a lot of work. Nearly ever file needs to be touched > in order to change the copyright notices. We probably need new > tool chains, want to merge in the v2 flash branch, maybe pick > up some patches which got dropped along the way etc. We need > to do a lot of testing.... If there's anything that can be done by soembody with a few hours a week to spare, let us know. As far as testing goes, my opinion is that a "release" doesn't have to be guaranteed 100% bug free. It would just need to mean that there aren't any known incomatibilities beetween major packages. I think what we need more than anything is just some snaphosts that can be used as reference points when discussing or documenting things. It's OK if release XYZ has some bugs. The important thing is to be able to say "I'm running release XYZ with these patches" and have that mean something. I know one can accomplish the same thing by using a CVS snapshot for a particular date/time, but without common reference points in the development history, it's difficult to even discuss some things. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! I'm gliding over a at NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP near visi.com ATLANTA, Georgia!! -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss