[Coco] nitros9 level3

[L. Curtis Boyle]

Like you, Boisy, I ran out of any free time to work on NitrOS9 (although in my case, years earlier). The amount of changes between the un-released Version 3 and NitrOS9 is pretty extensive, and Version 3 was a lot slower than NitrOS9. We did sneak a few minor things in, but the new windowing would be a major project (and probably require GrfDrv to got past the 8K limit (if that hasn't happened already... I just don't have time to keep up with NitrOS9 these days).


On Oct 19, 2012, at 9:17 AM, Boisy G. Pitre wrote:

> Getting the new windowing stuff from Level 2 Version 3 has been long discussed but nothing has ever been done.
> 
> NitrOS-9 is fully open source.  Go for it.  Get that code in GrfDrv and CoWin and let's have some resizable/movable windows.
> 
> I saw an earlier message where you claimed Shell+ was broken in NitrOS-9.  I'm not aware of any problems or missing functionality, but again, the source is there.
> 
> It's time for other people to start taking control of the NitrOS-9 Project.  I have less and less time these days and simply cannot do it.
> 
> On Oct 15, 2012, at 11:38 PM, Stephen H. Fischer <SFischer1 at MindSpring.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Some of the changes may break existing things, just like NitrOS-9 broke things that were working on OS-9.
>> 
>> And there is the case that not everyone is changing anything when changes are made to the current NitrOS9 project.
>> 
>> It would be an opportunity to get more people in sync. Tandy would have released a new version but it was killed. That would have put everyone in sync. We need to act like Tandy.
>> 
>> If I get some responses then a better case may be able to be made.
>> 
>> Gene said:
>> 
>>> Sick of being always out of system ram,
>> 
>> That to me says if successful it would be a good point. What else does "level 3" mean?
>> 
>> And there is the old standing question of MonkoWare.
>> 
>> You cannot just keep updating 1.0 without ever saying, this is a new NitrOS-9 system.
>> 
>> Every other program keeps putting out named revisions, when would be a better time for 1.0.0.0.1?
>> 
>> The question should at least be asked, what should the next version look like and contain.
>> 
>> Remember, evolve or die or something like that.
>> 
>> SHF
>> 
>> 
>> "Aaron Wolfe" <aawolfe-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org> wrote in message news:CAA6uQZSajraD5jwEH+Qd-eBThd-u1X2zfgXh8JQvZbP_7GUmGQ at mail.gmail.com...
>>> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:37 PM, Stephen H. Fischer
>>> <SFischer1-mn4gwa5WIIQysxA8WJXlww at public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> Gene, could this mutate into a new release of NitrOS-9, one that would be as
>>>> good as the OS-9 system I and others had at about the end of Delphi and CIS?
>>>> 
>>>> There is a lot of good work that did not make it into NitrOS-9.
>>>> 
>>>> Changes could be made and people would need to adapt just like if Tandy
>>>> released a new OS-9 Level-II version.
>>>> 
>>>> The new Windows I am talking about, four (4) 80 Track 2 Sided disks,
>>>> Shellplus restored back to it's glory (Parts just are not in NitrOS-9 that
>>>> are part of Shellplus) and so many other thing that I see are missing.
>>>> 
>>>> -----------------------
>>>> 
>>>> If anyone thinks that this is a good idea, or have items that you would like
>>>> to see in a new release, please send an e-mail to:
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Is there a reason to create a new release, rather than contributing
>>> the time and effort to the current NitrOS9 project alongside those who
>>> do so already?
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Coco mailing list
>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
> 
> 
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>