Stelian Ionescu wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 07:33:52AM -0700, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
>> Is GCL (upstream) really in trouble? I know SBCL is the most actively 
>> maintained open source Common Lisp these days, but quite a few 
>> projects have some GCL dependencies. The Axiom project (and its 
>> forks) seem to be moving to Clisp, but their base build is still 
>> GCL-based.
> 
> the Axiom project, well knowing GCL's problems, maintains its own GCL
> fork which is included in the tarballs it provides. I don't know about
> the other Axiom forks, since neither OpenAxiom nor FreeCAS are in
> portage
> that leaves maxima: infact the only reason why maxima still hangs to GCL
> is because they have no alternative to GCL on Windows, but that's not a
> problem for us
> 
Yeah ... I just posted my knowledge dump of Axiom and forks ...

The whole Axiom fork situation was/is rather tense -- a lot of 
ego-bashing/flaming on the mailing lists, etc. And then there's the 
whole Aldor licensing issue. NAG released it with a *non-commercial* 
clause in its license, which makes it incompatible with lots of other 
open source/free as in freedom licenses.

Axiom is, as far as I'm concerned, a "better" CAS than Maxima for a 
variety of reasons. But when there are three forks and the leads of each 
trash each other on mailing lists, I don't see how it can *stay* better 
than Maxima. I've said as much on the mailing lists. Ah well ... that's 
what makes open source fun, right? :)
-- 
gentoo-lisp@g.o mailing list