| 1 |
znmeb@×××××××.net wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>Quoting Krzysiek Pawlik <krzysiek.pawlik@××××××.pl>: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
>>purslow@×××××××××.ca wrote: |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>>>>Visit it's site: http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/bf/ |
| 11 |
>>>>- You'll know why 'parodical'. |
| 12 |
>>>> |
| 13 |
>>>> |
| 14 |
>>>not really: it looks like something which might have real uses. |
| 15 |
>>> |
| 16 |
>>> |
| 17 |
>>Hm... harder than perl, uglier than perl - nope. I think I'll stay with |
| 18 |
>>C/C++ and Python :) |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
>>>it's a pity its inventor gave it such an ugly name, |
| 23 |
>>>but some people are like that ... (smile). |
| 24 |
>>> |
| 25 |
>>> |
| 26 |
>>If someone doesn't like it's name - use acronym - bf |
| 27 |
>> |
| 28 |
>> |
| 29 |
>> |
| 30 |
>>>since the name is well-established, no objection here to adding it to |
| 31 |
>>> |
| 32 |
>>> |
| 33 |
>>Gentoo. |
| 34 |
>> |
| 35 |
>>I'm not a dev, but I don't have any objections too. |
| 36 |
>> |
| 37 |
>> |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
>Well ... someone's gotta step in and say "No!", so I will. I've just witnessed |
| 40 |
>and participated in a semi-debate on the value of devoting effort to |
| 41 |
>Gentoo/CygWin. If Gentoo/CygWin isn't worth the effort to maintain, why on |
| 42 |
>Earth are the developers wasting time on maintaining a package that does |
| 43 |
>absolutely nothing but *syntax coloring* in a *single* editor for a language |
| 44 |
>with a questionable name that is an 8-instruction Turing complete environment |
| 45 |
>limited to a 30 kilobyte address space? |
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
>Does Gentoo support the free APL derivative A Plus? How's that Axiom package |
| 48 |
>coming along? How about ebuilds for Common Lisp Music and Common Music |
| 49 |
>Notation? The x86-64 arch work -- that's all done, right? The GLSA integration |
| 50 |
>with Portage? |
| 51 |
> |
| 52 |
>I'm not going to leave Gentoo because it supports vim syntax coloring for |
| 53 |
>brainfuck and Fedora and Debian don't. And I'm not going to leave Gentoo if |
| 54 |
>Debian supports it and Gentoo doesn't either. I simply think that just because |
| 55 |
>something is easy doesn't necessarily mean it should be done. In this |
| 56 |
>particular case, rather than ask if anyone **objects** to the package, let me |
| 57 |
>ask "Is there a *compelling* reason why it **should** be in the Portage tree?" |
| 58 |
>-- |
| 59 |
>gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
| 60 |
> |
| 61 |
> |
| 62 |
Because there's someone who seems willing to create and maintain it. |
| 63 |
Apparently nobody has enough interest in those other packages to do so. |
| 64 |
Why don't you hire someone to do it for you since it sounds like you |
| 65 |
aren't really wanting to do so either. Maybe they'll give you a break |
| 66 |
on rates if you let them submit it to Gentoo with their names on it |
| 67 |
(even though the ebuilds would be works for hire). |
| 68 |
-- |
| 69 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives