Re: Adaforge?

[Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>]

Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote on comp.lang.ada:
> On Thu, 03 May 2012 13:33:58 +0100, Stephen Leake wrote:
> 
>> Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> writes:
>> 
>>> * As Dmitry well pointed out, there is a difference between
>>>   hosting sources and hosting binaries.  My stance on this
>>>   matter is probably well-known on this newsgroup.  In short,
>>>   binaries belong in the general-purpose repositories of their
>>>   target platforms; only this can give these binaries the
>>>   visibility they deserve. IOW, the packages should be in the
>>>   official Debian/Fedora/FreeBSD/Cygwin/Slackware/whatever
>>>   repository if one exists.  
>> 
>> +1
> 
> One of the tasks of AdaForge might be exactly this, advertising Ada
> libraries and applications in the corresponding communities (largely
> unaware of Ada) and pushing them into the official repositories and
> distributions.

That's what the GNU Ada Project on SourceForge is all about.  As I
said, there is no need for a new forge; there is need for more quality
content in existing forges.

http://sf.net/projects/gnuada

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.