On 25 Feb 2022 04:31, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 3:58 AM Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On 25 Feb 2022 02:45, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 1:53 AM Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > > On 25 Feb 2022 00:42, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 6:07 PM Bruno Haible wrote: > > > > > > Have you reported it? > > > > > > https://invisible-island.net/ncurses/ncurses.faq.html#report_bugs > > > > > > > > > > Oh yeah, forgot to mention... No public bug tracker. You could have > > > > > looked this up yourself if there was one. But yes, they've been > > > > > reported. > > > > > > > > the bug-ncurses@ list is the bug tracker. and it's public. oh, hai: > > > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-ncurses/2022-02/msg00013.html > > > > > > That's called a mailing list; not a bug tracker. > > > > that's what you call it > > > > but since you're trying to build a list of reasons that gnulib should fork, > > please point me to gnulib's "bug tracker" that isn't a mailing list > > Gnulib does not have one either. But it's irrelevant to this conversation.
it is not: you're trying to argue that ncurses is not well maintained because of X, and gnulib should fork it because gnulib is a "healthier" project, but then you want to ignore that gnulib also does X. i don't know if you're just not familiar with the GNU world, but mailing lists that serve as contact/bug trackers is not uncommon. maybe it's not what many people expect today from projects, but that doesn't mean it's not working. you also seem to be unfamiliar with what goes into a functional curses library (including the terminfo library). this is not a trivial undertaking by any means. there's a reason there's only like 2 viable projects out there. if you believe i'm being hyperbolic, then prove me wrong by forking it yourself showing how simple it is to maintain. -mike
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
