From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Tolpin <dvd@davidashen.net>
Message-Id: <200402281300.i1SD0Ipm044920@adat.davidashen.net>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] plan9 finished
In-Reply-To: <124b0b2bd6fb1fcc201f7e7ff1d33d5f@juice.thebigchoice.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:00:18 +0400
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 01e014f2-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

> >> When I said I tell people plan9 is finished I mean "complete" not "dead".
>
> >Do you think there is a difference between complete and dead?
>
> I prefer to think of it as stable and predictable.
> The kernel is finished modulo drivers. If fairly sure there won't suddenly be
> a new scheduler or VM or 9p2005 or a bunch of new syscalls to surprise me.
>
> I think people want to be sure in their time investment. If they see that
> someone is *still* fiddling with the kernel then if they put 6 months into
> learning the OS http://plan9.bell-labs.com/plan9dist/ will still be there at
> the end of it.
>
> Personally I'd prefer to think that if I download it today I won't have to be
> downloading updates every week for the rest of my days that break all my
> efforts to date.
>
> Personally I would still use plan9 if everyone else stopped, I'm sure plenty
> of us here feel the same.

So, what is the difference between a complete and a dead?