1 |
On Saturday 17 September 2005 01:20, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
2 |
> On Friday 16 September 2005 06:20 pm, Mark Loeser wrote: |
3 |
> > Since we currently have language herds for other languages such as Ada, |
4 |
> > Perl, and Java, I don't think C++ should be any different. |
5 |
> |
6 |
> it is different, but i dont mind the idea of having a bunch of C++ experts |
7 |
> looking over a bunch of packages which otherwise may be neglected |
8 |
|
9 |
And that's the point I see in as well - having some central point for our C++ |
10 |
experts/freaks. Of course, a c++ herd would not just be like ADA/Java IMO. |
11 |
|
12 |
Though, I vote FOR such a herd (and would like to join anyway) |
13 |
|
14 |
> > dev-libs/STLport (no-herd, vapier?) |
15 |
> |
16 |
> vapier/toolchain |
17 |
> |
18 |
> > dev-libs/fampp2 (no-herd, vapier) |
19 |
> > dev-libs/ferrisloki (no-herd, vapier) |
20 |
> > dev-libs/libferrisstreams (no-herd, vapier) |
21 |
> > dev-db/stldb4 |
22 |
> |
23 |
> generally i dont need help with these as the upstream author is a pretty |
24 |
> cool guy and gets back to me :) |
25 |
> -mike |
26 |
|
27 |
but having some backup is always the safer way, in case some of us is AFK for |
28 |
some unobvious reasons and a security patch is to be injected. |
29 |
|
30 |
Regards, |
31 |
Christian Parpart |