[Inx] Thread Two: RC-3 or not?

[Peter Garrett]

On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:54:24 +1000
"Samson Wong" <samson at gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, whether it's a RC -3 or 1.0 will depend on how stable it is I suppose,
> and whether we had reached any "milestones"
> 
> Don't do the eternal beta =P

You just gave me the idea for a naming method - new "unstable" ISOs
will be "inx-eternal"  ;)
> 
> As for inx-unstable, INX is always going to be a of a hobbyist, "just for
> fun" distro - no one really uses it for day to day normal computing (I
> think!!!). 

My second box is running INX exclusively ;-) But it has added bits like
sshd, apache2 and so on. Well, OK I'll come clean - it also has
*shudder* X,which I use to run a few apps over remote ssh, so I guess it
isn't *really* INX at all... :-(

> I personally think the audience for INX won't rate stability as
> a primary priority, and will probably choose to get unstable anyways.
> [That's what I'll do ;-)]

Yes, INX is a "niche within a niche" I guess. Stability in the usual
sense of the word isn't really an issue anyway, because INX is
ubuntu-minimal / ubuntu-standard plus bits and pieces. The underlying OS
is basic, and rock solid.
> 
> Stables IMO, would signify the points for achievement of "major milestones"
> in the process...
> 
Hmm - what would constitute a major milestone I wonder? A
reasonable installer would probably qualify I suppose.

> Quick intro - I'm Samson Wong aka Sertse aka fanboi #inx lurker. No
> particular skills, just really like this distro since it's so unique. And
> you guys are nice.

Awww...  :)

Peter