> > [Farid Hajji] > > including their amiga port? Actually, I personally think that one > > way to refactor the Hurd would be to do some kind of NetBSD/L4 > > port (or partial port) first and then use as much as possible from > > NetBSD's very clean architecture (MD vs. MI code, drivers, ...) > > as framework for the Hurd/L4. > > [Daniel Sieger] > I don't know how it is actually with the Hurd, but such a policy of > clean architecture and preference of a correct implementation in > contrast to a early release or fast implementation is something I really > would like to see. IMHO, to state out this policy clearly and keeping it > in mind while coding and making design decisions would be a nice step > into the right direction. Just a small sentence like "It is developed > with the goal of a clean design, architecture and correct implementation > in mind" or something like that on the Hurd Web pages would be very > fine, I think. But, of course, I'm actually not really in the position > to judge to what extend you already do this, or how far away it is from > reality. It might also have some positive effects on how the Hurd is > actually seen in public and by interested people or developers. Just my 2c.
We'll discuss this on l4-hurd. We're way off topic already :) -- Farid Hajji. http://www.farid-hajji.net/address.html
