Re: LYNX-DEV My planned version

[T.E.Dickey]

> [ omitting flames by M Sokolov and P Webb... ] 
>  
> I haven't kept up on all the threads here lately 
> (I read lynx-dev intermittently when I have time). 
> but i was under the impression that all parties agreed that 
> 2.8 was to be the devel code. 
(That was my impression ;-)

> Now it sounds as if there are competing versions. 
No.

> Has Tom's 2.8 been advertised?  Is it the official version? 
It's on the web pages.  I don't remember if Fote advertised previous
versions on newsgroups, and haven't gotten any feedback regarding that:

        what (if any) newsgroups should we use to announce 2.8?

> or are Fote and Mike working on a separate version? 
> If they are, are they going to start their own mailing list???? :( 
>  
> I should point out that the list of features of interest to blind users 
> that I posted last week are all in 2.7.2, not just 2.8. 
That's my impression as well.

> I might also say I have agreed with Fote on some misgivings about parts of 
> the devel code -- parsing strategy and complexity of the chartrans code 
> to name a few, as I had occasion to look at that code. 
Likewise me (though I have also concerns about 2.7.2 regarding portability
and maintainability).  However my impression was that it was better to
consolidate on what we have (because it works pretty well) than to spend
another 6 months redesigning it.
  
> It would be a shame to lose fote and mike as contributors. 
Fote's been announcing that he's not an active developer for more than a
year.  I do pay attention (and weigh) his input (though he does act more
like a competitor than a contributor).

I don't recall Mike's input, other than a little bit of generated code
(though Doug/Wayne/LP/Bill may know more).

> But if 2.8 does have a "twin" I'd be interested in seeing 
> how it progresses. 
sure (interesting ;-)
  
> *sigh* 
> --le 
> 


-- 
Thomas E. Dickey
address@hidden
http://www.clark.net/pub/dickey