Morten Torstensen wrote:
> Can gcc/make be distributed? Could people dedicate their CPU time ala
> SETI or folding@home to test builds and compiles? I am not sure where
> the bottleneck is, and I know throwing money and manpower does not
> always help when it comes to software development :)
There were a bunch of things that came together at the same time. So yes
perhaps more people would have helped here - but that again comes with
its own issues. Things that could have also helped are much faster
internet links, beefier build systems, access to certain data, more time
away from $DayJob, an economy and industry that wasent taking a crap,
people not having to work 10 to 12 hrs a day to (a) keep their jobs (b)
make up for work that other people who didn't have their jobs anymore
left behind. Add salt and spice to taste.
Some of these problems are solvable if they stay stationary.
Unfortunately, you will find that none of them are.
A lot of what CentOS is - directly maps back to the people involved, and
the process's being used. Take those away and the idea of centos is
becomes irrelevant. And for those who dont care much about either of
these two things, there is always an exit route, or a dozen.
There are about two dozen people involved with the centos 'team', and I
am sure each and everyone of us would like to spend more and more time
and resources on the project - but there are limits that must be honored.
Also, were not getting ready for 5.4. were going to be getting ready for
4.8 first, then a CentOS6 Beta and then a 5.4.
--
Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219@icq
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
