Re: Should the website still say that GRUB 2 is currently under development?

[Felix Zielcke]

Am Sonntag, den 25.10.2009, 19:21 +0100 schrieb Felix Zielcke:
> Am Montag, den 10.08.2009, 17:28 +0200 schrieb Robert Millan:
> > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 03:25:26PM +0200, Felix Zielcke wrote:
> > > Am Freitag, den 31.07.2009, 18:19 +0200 schrieb Robert Millan:
> > > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:45:35AM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 2009-07-30 at 15:05 +0200, adrian15 wrote:
> > > > > > Felix Zielcke escribió:
> > > > > > > I think the currently under development part can be now removed.
> > > > > > > Or would it be better to wait for the 1.97 release? (which 
> > > > > > > hopefully
> > > > > > > comes before December)
> > > > > > That would be nice because Debian freezes at December.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I don't see anything wrong with being "under development".  I hope 
> > > > > that
> > > > > GRUB 2 will be under development even after the 1.97.  I don't see how
> > > > > Debian can have any problem with that.
> > > > 
> > > > It depends.  If we say GRUB 2 is "under development" but we don't say 
> > > > anything
> > > > about GRUB Legacy, people might think GRUB 2 is not ready.


Oh I even forgot that there was in the meanwhile even someone in #grub
who was a bit scared of GRUB 2 because of this sentence.
But luckly not that scared to not ask how stable it is now.



-- 
Felix Zielcke
Proud Debian Maintainer and GNU GRUB developer