Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Phil White <cerise AT littlegreenmen.armory.com>]

Ok, I guess I've been using SM for somewhere in the neighborhood of 6 months.

From what I've seen, even in stable, there are spells which don't cast for one
reason or another.  There's still the whole matter of molasses-y slow file 
locking,
sorting, and /tmp seems to always be full of sorcery.* files or locklist* or 
some
other sorcery generated files.

Source Mage, at this point, seems like it's _miles_ away from 1.0.  Pushing 
for
1.0 is only going to aggravate the problems.

Every now and then Andrew and I get into arguments about Source Mage where his
only defense is to say "Well, it's still in development.   It's not 1.0 yet."

That doesn't excuse some of the more interesting problems of course, but if 
you're
going to inflict a distribution on the world, at least make it a reasonably 
good
FCS.  Have everything tested and working AOK.  

-Phil/CERisE 

On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 04:47:07PM +0000, Mark Andrews wrote:
> Hello Eric,
> 
> Wednesday, December 11, 2002, 3:53:18 PM, you wrote:
> 
> ES> Aside of the matter of who leads what, I would like to make a proposal 
> that
> ES> we drop the drive for a 1.0 release and the whole idea that we want to 
> push
> ES> for a distribution that MUST have releases and release dates.
> 
> Maybe we should just drop spells from the 1.0 release..
> 
> In other words we keep pushing for a 1.0 sorcery (including cauldron),
> but exclude the grimoires from point releases so they can be kept
> updated.
> 
> So instead of a "SourceMage 1.0 ISO", we get a "SourceMage yy/mm/dd ISO
> featuring Sorcery 1.0" that has the stable grimoire at yy/mm/dd..
> 
> Just a thought...
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
>  Mark                            mailto:msasgl AT msa-enterprises.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss