Re: [jos-general] "Final" thoughts (was: [Sister Project] Good idea?)

[John L. <je...@pi...>]

> I hate to single you out Gilbert but I think you're the only person
> arguing for making this a research project. Everyone else that has
> chimed in has said they want to build a specific implementation of jos
> and call it JOS.  I am sensing a consensus that people are willing to
> compromise on a single vision (even if its not exactly what they want)
> as long as it moves the project forward to creating a jos.  I believe
> there is an understanding that _any_ initial version of jos is better
> than nothing and that there will be future opportunities for adjusting
> the vision or forking off other versions of jos once we get _something_
> off the ground.

I agree with you.
 
> Does anyone else agree with Gilbert?  If so, please speak up.  I'd
> really like to keep things moving while we have some minimal momentum.
> As such, if there is no more debate I'd like to push forward and take a
> vote so we can move on (more debate beyond the established position of
> Gilbert and myself which seem pretty firm (and so further debate seems
> pointless)).

What vote would you like to take?

John Leuner