[Info-vax] September 6, 2016 - new Roadmap and State of the Port updates now on VSI website

[clairgrant71 at gmail.com]

On Friday, September 9, 2016 at 7:18:21 AM UTC-4, IanD wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 9:06:17 PM UTC+10, clairg... at gmail.com wrote:
> > As promised......first week in September updates.
> 
> On Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 9:06:17 PM UTC+10, clairg... at gmail.com wrote: 
> > As promised......first week in September updates. 
> 
> Awesome, just friggin awesome! 
> 
> 3 years for x86-VMS proper, or there about (I had written 2, now I've edited it).
> 
> Isn't it about 2 years now since VSI has shone the light of hope on OpenVMS now anyhow? That time has gone by fairly quickly
> 
> So it's about 2 1/2 perhaps until an early adopters version and then another year for full x86-VMS?
> 
> I thought the original road-map was 2018 and now it's 2019? It is what it is and obviously as things unfold more details as to what's needed will push and pull on timelines, so no complaints
> 
> What will we see in the next 3 years in IT is anyone's guess
> 
> Thanks Clair for the update and of course to all the folks beavering away behind the scenes to make all this happen :-)

Yes, VSI started in August of 2014. It finally seems like we are making some progress on the bigger things we promised back in the beginning.

I’ve been waiting for the 2018 -> 2019 question. This is a matter of my own personal taste in roadmaps. I like one page; it keeps everyone focused on a few important things, avoids sifting through a lot of stuff, and limits pie-in-the-sky promises. I like having an actual plan in place or knowing that a plan will be in place by the time it is needed.

Now that 2016 is out of the way, on the Roadmap, all I really did was expand what has always been the plan for x86. For Alpha-to-Itanium we did 8.0, 8.1, and 8.2. I suspect a similar sequence for x86. The reasons for the crawl-walk-run releases may be different this time but I imagine something will emerge. They may be more logistical than technical. Anyway, it’s worked twice before. I like the cross-build, native-build separation because it can get some partners going early and takes some time pressure off us. If a third iteration is needed, as we did on Itanium, then so be it.