Hi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well ... someone's gotta step in and say "No!", so I will. I've just witnessed and participated in a semi-debate on the value of devoting effort to Gentoo/CygWin. If Gentoo/CygWin isn't worth the effort to maintain, why on Earth are the developers wasting time on maintaining a package that does absolutely nothing but *syntax coloring* in a *single* editor for a language with a questionable name that is an 8-instruction Turing complete environment limited to a 30 kilobyte address space?
1. Getting Gentoo/* running and stable is a vast effort compared to maintain such a package.
2. It's fun.
Does Gentoo support the free APL derivative A Plus? How's that Axiom package coming along? How about ebuilds for Common Lisp Music and Common Music Notation? The x86-64 arch work -- that's all done, right? The GLSA integration with Portage?
We're not here to give you your dream system, we're here to have fun (at least i hope so). Would you install an IRC server on a notebook and use it to chat in a train where all people are less than 3 meters from each other? It doesn't make any sense at all, but I can tell you, it's fun.
1. You can't force people to do what you want other than you pay them.
2. We're not one big dev-team, everyone has different interests. I'm pretty sure some people won't ever work on e.g. Gentoo/AMD64 simply because they don't have an amd64.
something is easy doesn't necessarily mean it should be done. In this particular case, rather than ask if anyone **objects** to the package, let me ask "Is there a *compelling* reason why it **should** be in the Portage tree?"
Of course there is a reason: You can read your bf-programs easier.
Greetings,
blubb -- [email protected] mailing list
