[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

status update for grub 2 developments?

From: Vesa Jääskeläinen
Subject: status update for grub 2 developments?
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2007 15:47:23 +0300
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20070604)

Hi all!

I think it would be wise to keep some kind of status updates from time
to time so we can keep track on what people are doing (related to grub
2). If we continue with current situation we are long in 2010's before
we have next release.

I think it would also be important to coordinate more different
activities within grub 2. In example graphical menu has been issue for
several years now :). Therefore I would propose that we would setup a
group of people that would concentrate on specific issues related to
implmentation (like a work group or something). I do not see it as a
requirement that this group of people would implement the feature
(though that would be good), but most importantly to draft out how
features should work. When there is a spec written how feature should
work then it would be much easier to implement that feature and then it
would match ideology of other relevant developers (eg. to get patch

I would see that at least following working groups should be formed. Of
course we could tackle design issue at a time and then move to other issues.

- Graphical menu (needs API spec, configuration file specs, guidelines
for implementation, information how to integrate with scripting)

- Network support (needs API spec, driver architecture, protocol stacks,
file system support)

Perhaps some others too... (please add)

Anyway. First of all I would like to hear if you are developing
something above or something else, reply this e-mail and tell us about
it, there is no reason that work should be duplicated. Especially if you
are already developing a feature your words would be good to be heard.
If you are just reporting back list of stuff you are working on, please
keep list as simple and clean as we want only big picture :). You could
also describe how are you progressing with the feature.

Ideas are welcome where to store this information are also welcome :).
We would need to track requirements for features on component level.
More automated the better.

Vesa Jääskeläinen

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]