Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lord <address@hidden> writes:

    Tom> Ok.  While I don't think the functionality should exactly
    Tom> mimic your script, the desirability of interacting reasonably
    Tom> with `-L'

What bothers me about this whole thread is that anybody who has a
script that implements a different process is likely to get broken
every time you add features.  This has happened to archivist-mode
several times already; tla stops accepting certain options, runtime
error.  tla expects something in the environment, runtime error.

This is a bad thing, because it inhibits experimentation.

If there were a public API implementing the arch commands at the C
level, I'd either link XEmacs to it or shut up, but there ain't.

Colin proved that this kind of interaction can be done by a script.
Why must it be added to tla?  Have we abandoned the tiny tools
approach?  :-(

-- 
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences     http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
               Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
              ask what your business can "do for" free software.