Yes, I agree.
At the very least, it sure would be nice to have a read-only source tree
available. It's understood that many things will be broken, but without
a visible source base that tracks active development, you're not getting
any of the benefits of an 'open' development model.
Personally, I don't follow the concept of only releasing a stable source
tree as mentioned on the OMPI web site. If I want a stable source tree,
I'll download a tar-ball or a tagged version of the tree. Unless you
have some compelling reasons that make this different than the rest of
1000's of 'open' projects.
If not your release strategy, then perhaps the OMPI folks could at least
revisit the issue of having a more transparent development
cycle...there's not even a devel or commit mailing list.
Looking forward to the release.
> > Please adopt a release-early, release-often strategy.
> Could not agree more!
> > "Show us the code!"
> > -scott
> > _______________________________________________
> > users mailing list
> > users_at_[hidden]
> > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
> users mailing list