I agree with Steve. I like the community approach to this matter: if plan9 doesn't have what you need, do it yourself; if you do something that might be useful for others share it and see what happens. Being a newbie myself I find very hard to write my own utilities, but that's a good way to learn ;-)
2010/3/30 Steve Simon <[email protected]>: >> No one's willing to spearhead a "General Purpose 9" experiment, and no >> one's interested in collaborating on and contributing to such a project? >> >> "If you want [general purpose], you know where to get it." seems to >> be the period that ends all such discussion. > > I wouldn't quite agree, the discussions usually end one of three ways: > > - somone wants somthing like gnome, and are encouraged to run linux. > > - somone wants "the community" to port smthing like gnome and noone is > interested so they get bored and go away. > > - somone wants to write some code to solve a problem they have with plan9 > and the just get on with it and tell the list when its done. > > An example: > > I need SVN support at work, cinap has wrapped up his linuxemu with the snv > client and the apropriate shared libraries (thanks cinap). This allows me to > continue using plan9 (as I do every day, all day). > > In parallel I now have written a webdav client which I hope will become > a DeltaV/SVN client for plan9. I feel its worth writing as I think it is > interesting to try and fit the plan9 file model to SVN's version control > model. > > I wanted it, I got on with it and wrote it. > >> I can't help but wonder: where's the crux of the inertia? > > An interesting question. If you can garner enthusism from the list > perhaps you can be "the one" to spearhead a new burst of enthusism? > > -Steve > > -- Hugo
