A modest proposal: call it 1.0

[Bernhard Reutner-Fischer]

On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 11:29:43PM -0700, Erik Andersen wrote:
>On Wed Feb 02, 2011 at 11:20:25PM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
>> If you're going to add NPTL support after five years of development, and
>> you're going to have at least 3 release candidates, and we're going to
>> test everything to the hilt...
>> 
>> Call the release 1.0.0 please.
>
>For whatever my opinion is presently worth (having gotten this
>project stated, yet having been otherwise occupied for the past
s/stat/start/
>several years), I approve and second Rob's modest proposal.

This does not currently warrant a 1.0

See previous (below adjusted) mail: chiming in 1.0.0-rc1
TODO list for 1.0.0-rc1, random order.

- Adjust Rules.mak MAJOR_VERSION, MINOR_VERSION, SUBLEVEL, EXTRAVERSION
  Make sure that soname remains at .0
- disable !NPTL for arches that have NPTL impls.
  Disable threads for everybody who doesn't have NPTL to force
  psychological strain (one could argue about this).
  Where '+' means ported, 'o' means TODO/needs verification
  o alpha
  + arm
  o avr32
  o bfin
  o cris
  o e1
  o frv
  o h8300
  o hppa
  + i386
  o i960
  o ia64
  o m68k
  o microblaze
  o mips
  o nios
  o nios2
  + powerpc
  o sh
  o sh64
  o sparc
  o v850
  o vax
  o x86_64
  o xtensa
  Arches that pretend to support threads (i.e. NPTL) have to submit
  sensible testresults to be whitelisted (ideally on a regular base,
  automated).
- SUSv4 audit
  This would be the big thing, API-wise, to warrant a 1.0.

The SUSv4 audit is really crucial to call it 1.0. Help in this effort is
very much appreciated, as always.

We will (at least) not wait as long as between .31 -> .32 for a .33,
just a couple of months this time and we will do our best to make our
SUSv4 release a great 1.0 ! :)