From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,35ce1c7836290812 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@gnat.com Subject: Re: SGI GNAT Question? (Long) Date: 1999/03/10 Message-ID: <7c6te3$j81$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 453554138 References: <7bflkk$78i$1@news.ro.com> <7bhlb2$h4n$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7bia5u$3lt$1@news.ro.com> <7bkasm$rlt$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <36DE8585.2B5E6A5C@spam.com> <7bmbr5$j3p$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <36DFA6FB.D3A2AD84@spam.com> <7bos1q$ogq$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7bp6pv$2mm$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7bpjoe$eia$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <36E25778.C056829@chocolatesaltyballs.com> <7bu97u$49l$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <36E43789.12AAED5C@chocolatesaltyballs.com> <7c2a66$h6g$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <36E6361A.D651CAD7@spam.com> <876789s6or.fsf@mihalis.ix.netcom.com> <7c6ekr$57h$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <87lnh52i3d.fsf@mihalis.ix.netcom.com> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x11.dejanews.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14 Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Mar 10 22:58:18 1999 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I) Date: 1999-03-10T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <87lnh52i3d.fsf@mihalis.ix.netcom.com>, Chris Morgan wrote: > [1]Prof. Dewar was insistent that this is true and often > not recognized publically. I guess it's the "major > developments" bit that is key here - perhaps the open > informal teams are getting left behind by heretofore > private work I don't know about, it's entirely possible. Well you certainly can't know about the internal Cygnus work if you have not signed a non-disclosure, and even then they often hold their road maps quite closely even with respect to their major customers. The important thing to realize is that EGCS is NOT a Cygnus project. It is independent at this stage. Yes, Cygnus has a lot of influence, and several people on the EGCS board are from Cygnus, and Cygnus also invests substantial resources in keeping EGCS synchronized to some extent with their internal tree. But major development work that goes on in the internal tree is not reflected day to day in the EGCS tree, and indeed you would not want it to be in my opinion, and the Cygnus operating procedure seems quite reasonable. Same thing with GDB, the GDB 5.0 tree that is internal to Cygnus is most certainly not externally visible, and details of this tree are released only to their closest large customers. Again, this seems entirely reasonable to me! As for Redhat and Linux, the same kind of relationship exists between the internal Redhat development and the externally visible version of Linux. In that case we know a little more about what is going on inside, from news stories, for example, the development of the new journaling file system which is reportedly going on. The fact of the matter is that major developments require a lot of synchronized design and planning, and are just not susceptible to the approach of having lots of people contributing independently. Robert Dewar Ada Core Technologies Robert Dewar Ada Core Technologies -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own