There a bug with the ML or something?  Cause this message got sent twice.  Anyways.<br>
<br>
1. I personally don&#39;t see a problem with a moving target with the Win32
side, and the kernel has been held at 2003 for quite some time now.  But that&#39;s for the people working on those components to comment on, whether they want to deal with working on branches.  And as I pointed out in the latest newsletter and Ged&#39;s additional comments on osnews, the project has Vista has its Win32 target, so there&#39;s nothing wrong when developers do implement Vista specific items in Win32.  Assuming you&#39;re objecting to this, I disagree with going for a &quot;frozen&quot; target since the nature of software development and the IT field works against such a model.  This doesn&#39;t mean I don&#39;t have reservations about going after a moving target, but I find it more strategically advantagenous in the long term.<br>

<br>
2. I&#39;ve seen quite a bit of the former, but I&#39;m not really aware of any
apps being hacked in order to run on ROS.  It&#39;s been the position of
the project for a really long time that people don&#39;t introduce hacks to get things to work on ROS.  Those that have in recent times do get called out for it.  If you see it, then point it out.<br><br>3. I wish you the best of luck getting the devs to do this.  Trying to mandate it isn&#39;t going to work if the devs themselves aren&#39;t willing to put forth the effort to do it.  That&#39;s not to say the idea is bad, but going for an all out test-centric development methodology may not be practical.<br>
<br>4. Again, people who do this today get called out on it and the rest of the devs have been spending a considerable amount of time trying to untangle the old code that was doing this.<br><br>In response to your second email, the driver stuff is kernel side, not user side.  We&#39;ll cross that bridge when we decide to go for a NT6 kernel.<br>