Re: [Chicken-users] CMake problem on Linux should be solved

[John Cowan]

Brandon J. Van Every scripsit:

> >Actually, it does matter to us whether you or Brandon are getting burned
> >out: it would be a huge job to take over supporting even the CMake build
> >from zero, 
> 
> Actually I don't agree.  I didn't do the "write obscure code so that I 
> remain invaluable" thing, I did rather the opposite.  :-)  The CMake 
> build is currently feature complete, and it's MIT licensed, so you 
> simply can't start "from zero."  

It would be understanding and support that would have to start from zero,
not coding.  And FLOSSfolk have seen repeatedly that unless there's
a maintainer, people stay away from projects, because of the often
well-founded suspicion that nobody knows what's going on.

> Yes, that matters.  My strategic thought has been, it's BSD licensed 
> code, and I do have an interest in writing compilers.  So maybe 2 years 
> from now, I'll know the implementation well enough that in the worst 
> case, it won't matter to me what Felix is doing.  Right now I'd be toast 
> though.  Chicken *is* fully understandable by 1 person.  

The question is, is there anyone who has both the motivation and the
time?  I don't hear anyone, so that's why your and Felix's state of
mind both matter.

-- 
No,  John.  I want formats that are actually       John Cowan
useful, rather than over-featured megaliths that   http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
address all questions by piling on ridiculous      address@hidden
internal links in forms which are hideously
over-complex. --Simon St. Laurent on xml-dev