From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,88ed72d98e6b3457 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-10-11 07:35:05 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3F881515.4060305@noplace.com> From: Marin David Condic User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 (OEM-HPQ-PRS1C03) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Standard Library Interest? References: <3F7F760E.2020901@comcast.net> <3F8035B0.7080902@noplace.com> <3F816A35.4030108@noplace.com> <3F81FBEC.9010103@noplace.com> <6Ingb.30667$541.13861@nwrdny02.gnilink.net> <3F82B4A4.5060301@noplace.com> <3F82F527.3020101@noplace.com> <3F846B5E.9080502@comcast.net> <3F855460.6020804@noplace.com> <3F86211B.103@comcast.net> <3F8640CA.6090306@noplace.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 14:35:04 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.165.2.136 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net 1065882904 209.165.2.136 (Sat, 11 Oct 2003 10:35:04 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 10:35:04 EDT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:666 Date: 2003-10-11T14:35:04+00:00 List-Id: It won't work. It hasn't worked. If you can at *minimum* get the vendors to give you a nod that says "Yes, if such a thing were done under the control of this organization and with this sort of license and to some level of acceptable quality, we'd get on board and distribute it...", then you've got something. They don't have to commit to the library and wouldn't want to until they saw the net result. But if the answer is "No. We will not now, nor will we ever distribute a library built by this organization with that license, etc., - not unless it is totally rammed down our throats by the end users...", then the game is over. Don't waste time trying to get some organization together and get a project started unless you know from the start that the ultimate authority on acceptance is at least willing to consider it a possibility. So far, I have no indication that this is the case. MDC Warren W. Gay VE3WWG wrote: > > I believe this will happen as a natural consequence of doing this > important work. The vendor won't want to incurr extra work, unless > there is some wild advantage to them doing so. > > I believe that this effort merely needs to organize the naming > conventions such that it is not likely to stomp on some existing > vendor naming convention. Surely industry experience can steer > us away from most of these problem areas without waiting for > vendors? > -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ a c m . o r g "All reformers, however strict their social conscience, live in houses just as big as they can pay for." --Logan Pearsall Smith ======================================================================