[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lynx-dev GNKSA review of Lynx 2.8
From: |
T.E.Dickey |
Subject: |
Re: lynx-dev GNKSA review of Lynx 2.8 |
Date: |
Sat, 1 Aug 1998 06:57:46 -0400 (EDT) |
>
> [ list only ]
> >
> > As has been mentioned before, features in lynx are added or removed on a
> > volunteer basis. If you wish to see a change in lynx, feel free to submit
>
> That's also true of trn, which is probably the basis of most of the good
> feature in the GNKSA. What this really demonstrates is the undesirability
> of giving into the pressure to make Lynx do everything; the Unix component
> approach results in people being able to concentrate their effort on one
> component and get that to do a single job very well, whereas 5% of the
> effort on Lynx news is never going to create a trn.
exactly - it's worth making what Lynx does work correctly, but not a good
way to spend time making it look like the newsreader programs that are the
model for someone's checklist of "required" features.
--
Thomas E. Dickey
address@hidden
http://www.clark.net/pub/dickey
- Re: lynx-dev GNKSA review of Lynx 2.8,
T.E.Dickey <=
- Re: lynx-dev GNKSA review of Lynx 2.8, David Woolley, 1998/08/03
- Re: lynx-dev GNKSA review of Lynx 2.8, David Woolley, 1998/08/03
- Re: lynx-dev GNKSA review of Lynx 2.8, Philip Webb, 1998/08/03
- Re: lynx-dev GNKSA review of Lynx 2.8, Nelson Henry Eric, 1998/08/10
- Re: lynx-dev GNKSA review of Lynx 2.8, T.E.Dickey, 1998/08/10