Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 13th Dec 2017 23:54 UTC
BeOS & Derivatives

I've now turned my attention to preparation for beta1. Already talk has resumed on the mailing list of a tentative schedule; there still remains too much to do to expect it before the new year, but with the list of blockers now reduced effectively to two (one relating to installing source packages on the actual release image, which I intend to look into solving soon; the other is about clashing mime supertype declaration and may prove trickier to solve), the actual "release branch" is hopefully not more than a month away.

I've already begun drafting release notes and making build system cleanups as part of preparation. There is finally light at the end of the tunnel - don't give up hope yet. :)

I'm just putting it out there that if all goes according to plan, I'll be spending lots of time in a nice Haiku virtual machine over the coming weeks to get a really good look at the state of the continuation of the best operating system ever made.

It's time.

E-mail Print r 11   38 Comment(s)
Thread beginning with comment 652030
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Comment by neticspace
by agami on Fri 15th Dec 2017 02:43 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by neticspace"
agami
Member since:
2015-09-24

You are correct in stating that reverse engineering is perfectly legal in most jurisdictions.
As long as you don't use any of the original's code or employ any of the coders from the copyright holder.
Not that employing coders from a commercial OS team is illegal, it's just that if you're planning on releasing an API compatible OS, then it's hard to prove that the coder you hired had nothing to do with it.

Also, I used MacOS (System 6 and up) for many years, on 68k and PPC, and never really enjoyed it. But I did enjoy BeOS, and I suspect others at the time did as well.

Reply Parent Score: 1