Re: design goals vs mechanisms

[Marcus Brinkmann]

At Thu, 27 Oct 2005 19:27:08 +0200,
Alfred M Szmidt wrote:
>    I do not dig into the internals of the FSF, so maybe my impression
>    was wrong.  But I definitely remember that I saw something, maybe a
>    quote or an announcement, which indicated that Linux was going to
>    be the official GNU kernel.  This was in spring 2001.
> 
> Your claim makes no sense, if the Hurd was so darn broken in 2001,
> then I fail to see how 150 commits later (in 2002) it was so fixed
> that one could make a release of it.  You know that doesn't make any
> sense right?

As I have already explained: RMS' public statement in India that the
Hurd can be released in 2002 was totally baseless, and it was not
coordinated with any of us.  It was quite embarrassing, to tell the
truth.  I very vividly remember that somebody told me that we hit
slashdot again, and that was the first I heard of it.

The important thing however is that this happened one year _after_ we
talked with Bradley Kuhn at the LSM 2001.
 
> And I do not recall any such statment from RMS about ditching the
> Hurd, only `our difficulties to debugin asynchrounus multithreaded
> programs'.
>
> In other words, what you say happened, didn't happen.

Now returning from planet Alfred, mostly because I'm scared: Just
because you don't know about it doesn't mean it didn't happen.  In
fact, there are plenty of things going on that you don't know about.
And they all happen.  Without you having even a chance to recall them
later.

Thanks,
Marcus