[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] is there demand for itla?

From: Jan Hudec
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] is there demand for itla?
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 12:45:27 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.4i

On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 16:43:10 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 08:33:23AM -0800, Tom Lord wrote:
> > 
> > I've been thinking a lot since it came up about how to actually 
> > build itla.
> > 
> > I believe it would be about 1-3 month's work to get a useful first
> > release that is then fairly easy to extend.  I also think it would
> > wind up eventually being a very handy tool for writing an arch GUI and
> > for writing overarch-style functionality.
> > 
> > The question I'm stuck on is how much "demand" there is for itla.
> > Opinions?  Ideas? Rants?  Tips?   I think it's a pretty exciting idea 
> > but I'm not sure what priority to give it relative to other projects.
> > 
> > Enclosed is a fresh description of what itla would do initially, how
> > it would work, and then how it could help with GUIs.
> from my part I don't care about a GUI or itla or anything, until cvsps
> equivalent exists and works efficiently.

tla logs does the basic functionality of cvsps. Itla is what should
provide thre rest!

> arch still lacks core features, from my point of view it's pointless to
> add an interactive thing or a GUI until arch is more powerful than cvsps
> and bitkeeper.
> I would only recommend you not to force people not to make itla
> mandatory for building tla, I'm not going to install guile in my system,
> not a single package in my install requires that and I use pymacs to
> emacs script.

It can be ported to kawa or bigloo and compiled to java classes (kawa or
bigloo) or C (bigloo). It would, however, lack the extensibility.

                                                 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec 

reply via email to

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