Gentoo Archives: gentoo-lisp

From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@×××××××.net>
To: Stelian Ionescu <sionescu@×××××××××××.net>
Cc: gentoo-lisp@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-lisp] Last Rites: dev-lisp/gcl-cvs
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 15:51:59
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-lisp] Last Rites: dev-lisp/gcl-cvs by Stelian Ionescu
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


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-lisp] Last Rites: dev-lisp/gcl-cvs "Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <hkBst@g.o>