Tue Mar 19 01:43:03 2002
Jochen Küpper wrote:
> I am not claiming that I would have spent time, 'cause I haven't
> looked at gpa for a while (since nothing was going on and moreover I
> just didn't use it so far. Last time I checked it was still kind of
It is usable now.
> And then I work mostly on the commandline or in emacs anyway.)
Perfect. Then you will have no problem with GPA 0.5.0:
If you don't like it, don't use it.
> The question here is whether it was necessary to let get cvs out of
> sync from the start. At least there would have been the possibility
> to create a new branch for your stuff -- without getting into too many
> discussions -- that could be merged back. And ChangeLog? Are you
> suggesting there is no documentation about what you did at all? If it
> isn't needed, why bother writing it now:( Otherwise, just put it in
> there, it might be terse, but that's better than nothing.
You seem to know exactly what has to be done. Please do it then.
If you don't like the way how GPA 0.5.0 was created, be welcome to
do it better. You have the full source code of both GPA 0.5.0 and
0.4.3, and the GNU GPL grants you full permission to use it.
This is not a drink-or-die situation as with proprietary software.
You have the freedom.
BTW, as far as GPA is concerned, *we* gave this freedom to you.
(_G-N-U_) Dr. rer. nat. Peter Gerwinski <firstname.lastname@example.org>
o o G-N-U GmbH, EDV-Dienstleistungen, http://www.g-n-u.de