W(h)ither Rev??? - (was sundry recent rants, with ever-increasing parentheses and unending tree branches)

[Bob Warren]

Andre wrote:

>Bob:

we have order and we have progress... runrev is on a nice, orderly
position in the 2.8.x series and have a clear roadmap to progress...

again, what do you want from open source that can't be achieved by
closed source?

Andre

-----------------------------------------------------------
Hi Andre,

Just so as not to leave it up in the air.......
I think we are talking at cross-purposes because of the confusion of recent threads.

1) The kind of "order and progress" I would like to see is the regularity of Rev's production procedures, better handling and turnaround of bugfixing, better general communication at all levels, etc. Or to use Chipp's word, a much more "professional" approach.

2) Although I associate myself with the Linux movement, I have never been particularly in favour of "open source" and I have never ever recommended this in relation to Rev. However, I would also never attempt to censor discussion about it, or any other consideration for that matter. All ideas can be useful if you are attempting to innovate rather than "defend".

Bob