[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: LYNX-DEV source size, source reorganization

From: Foteos Macrides
Subject: Re: LYNX-DEV source size, source reorganization
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 1997 23:38:51 -0500 (EST)

On 9 May 1997 "T.E.Dickey" <address@hidden> wrote:
>> [Fote:]
>>       The parent link for that URL has a link for the current, actual
>> development code.  However, none of the currently active developers are
>> "VMSers", and no VMSers can be seen on the horizon for becoming active
>> in Lynx development, so the long-term future of Lynx on VMS presently is
>> unclear.
>I've been developing on VMS since 1984, and have acquired a little knowledge
>about it - but do not have a long-term development platform, so decline to
>pursue this thread.

On Tue, 16 Sep 1997 "T.E.Dickey" <address@hidden> wrote:
>> [Fote:]
>> .com and .mms files, or via direct editing of HTFTP.c.  No effort
>> has been made to keep the .com and .mms files updated in the devel
>> code, so the NOPORT matter is a relatively minor issue as far as
>> VMS is concerned, i.e., relative to other needs for VMS to continue
>> being one of the supported platforms.
>I assume that whoever's interested in keeping VMS working will tell us
>when we make changes that break something on that platform.  (The
>mms and com scripts have been stable for a couple of months, so I've
>forgotten - if I was ever told - any problems that relate to the work
>that I'm doing).

        The devel code has not been able to build on VMS for much more
than a couple of months.  That's why, after I ended up releasing on
April 4, as v2.7.1, what I had intended to be just personal mods made
available to the currently active Lynx developers for possible inclusion
in the actual development code, I also posted another message that VMSers
with programming skills should become active in Lynx development if Lynx
is to remain ported to VMS.  I suppose the persistent inability to build
the devel code on VMS is a form of stability. :)

        I'm not sure why you bothered to inform lynx-dev that you in
fact have 13 years of experience developing on VMS when you have no
interest in helping to maintaining the port, and given that experience,
am purplexed at how you could possibly think that the .com and .mms
have no problems.  In any case, less than two months ago you posted
a message indicating that you will have access to a VMS system for
another two months.   Take a moment to try to build the devel code
on it.  You'll have a field day collecting compiler error messages.
You might even encode them and post that to lynx-dev with a
"It doesn't build on VMS." leader (like your utterly unhelpful
"It doesn't build on linux." post about the fotemods last month :).

On 17 Sep 1997 Nelson Henry Eric <address@hidden> wrote:
>I am confident the present developers are concerned about keeping as
>many ports of Lynx supported as possible.  It is at least my intent to
>have the INSTALLATION file cover all ports.  "No effort has been made
>to keep the .com and .mms files updated" only means that context diffs
>have not been forthcoming on the lynx-dev mailing list.  In general,
>efforts to keep things up to date for a particular port, whether that
>be Unix, VMS, DOS386, Win32 (and still waiting for Mac), have to be made
>by the people who are actually using that port.  I know for a fact that
>you, Fote, are not the only knowledgeable person who compiles Lynx on
>VMS.  Those are the people who are not making any efforts, IMHO.  Keep
>the patches coming; keep providing input - everybody!

        As in years gone by, I've continued to check out any mods or
enhancements I make in the Lynx code on Unix guest accounts, so that
as far as I know lynx2-7-1+fotemods builds on both VMS and the supported
flavors of Unix, and Klaus has been incorporating the fotemods into the
devel code, but I suspect Klaus is not in a position to keep the entirety
of the devel code ported to VMS, nor Wayne, nor Jim.  So unless people
with substantive experience developing on VMS and an earnest concern
about keeping Lynx ported to that platform join the ranks of "currently
active Lynx developers", VMSers would be wise to recognize that the
future of Lynx on VMS is still unclear.


 Foteos Macrides            Worcester Foundation for Biomedical Research
 address@hidden         222 Maple Avenue, Shrewsbury, MA 01545
; To UNSUBSCRIBE:  Send a mail message to address@hidden
;                  with "unsubscribe lynx-dev" (without the
;                  quotation marks) on a line by itself.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]