From: Hartmut Niemann <niemann@cip.e-technik.uni-erlangen.de>
  To  : ggi-develop@eskimo.com
  Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 17:51:39 +0200 (MESZ)

Re: kgicon -> linux-2.2 ideas (was Re: Makefile vote II)

Hi!
So we really want to have the kgicon/driver tree included into the
2.2.0 tree? Really? Are we ready?

This would give me major headake, I think.

Hey, folks, 2.2.0 is not the end of Linux development.
It is a milestone, and being in would be cool... but only if it works.

How many people actually run successfully a GGI driver with kgicon
on a 2.1.12? kernel? I believe that we should have a broader base
first. And I would like to have a really stable kernel released
before we get in, but maybe I am just paranoid. Just in case our
system has a major flaw we don't know.

I feel that a good GGI degas Beta 1 in Mid-October would be far more
important, and it does not have to be full-featured, but it would be
nice if we could document exactly what works and what not, and what to
consider early alpha stage.

Oh, by the way: I think we shouldn't give our releases a number.
libggi will have one, the drivers have versions, the libggi2d has a number...
We should stick to the names for releases ("GGI Degas (final) consists of
libggi-2.1, libggi2d-0.99, libggi3d-0.1 ... kgicon-981115 ...),
give the libraries numbers as everybody does (but do not try to change the
scheme. Libggi is 1.5 now and shouldn't get lower than that :-), and give
the driver packages simply a release date.

Hartmut
--  
Hartmut Niemann   --   niemann(a)cip.e-technik.uni-erlangen.de
http://cip2.e-technik.uni-erlangen.de:8080/hyplan/niemann/index_en.html [/ggi]