Re: Ada OS

[anon@anon.org (anon)]

Really, you say: No release!

http://c2ada.wiki.sourceforge.net/

This web page ("wiki") should contain the history and status 
of the project. Location of the main documentation and links 
to the files.

No files in the Download section but there are in the SVN area!

http://c2ada.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/c2ada/

"jcreem" may be the one that inserted the files but as primary 
manager, "Simon Wright" is responsible for the project.

A unmodified version of the file c2ada_linux_august_2007.zip 
should be in the download area as an archived version. 

You did not see my other post on Ada OS where I stated that 
to proved the usage and to documentation the operation of 
the "c2ada" the program should be used on itself. No rewrite!
Just using the program on itself to prove that it works and 
then posting this new version.

That is:

                1. Placed the original zip file into the download 
                   area stating that this was the original code and 
                   is stored for archiving purposes only.

                2. Documenting the following steps ( 3 .. 5 ).

                3. Compile the program.

                4. Using the c2Ada to convert the original "c2ada" 
                   C code to a standard Ada 95 code.

                5. Editing the 20% of the code that the program 
                   bypasses.

                6. Placing this new "ADA ONLY" version into the 
                   SVN tree as well as an archived version in the 
                   downloading area. 

                7. Insert the documented transition (from step 2) 
                   into the web site.

        Time Table: A couple of weekends. Basically while watching 
                    TV on Saturday and Sunday afternoon. One weekend 
                    for converting the program and a second for 
                    correcting the documentation and uploading.

        Then later:
                8. Update the program for Ada 2005. 


Of course, you could leave step 8 for others but the documentation 
on the main web page should say this. And for editing the program 
could be done during commercials. 

As for SourceForce.Net, it is for open source projects, not for a set 
of broken projects that hurt the OSI because they do not work. It is 
one thing, if the project becomes outdated, but projects like "c2ada" 
do not become outdated. Well maybe if "C" becomes outdated, but that 
is not going to happen any time soon.

And I would NEVER create an empty (more than a day or two) project or 
have a project that is broken, because that hurts the OSI. But if you 
look (search SourceForce) there are 100s of abandon projects at 
SourceForce that is hurting SourceForce as well as the OSI.


In <m2abngf30h.fsf@mac.com>, Simon Wright <simon.j.wright@mac.com> writes:
>anon@anon.org (anon) writes:
>
>> That's one problem that I was also hinting at!
>>
>> If a person manages an Ada project they should insure that each
>> version of the project works. And use documentation to info the user
>> how to make it work and states any known problems. Instead of just
>> finding an old project and dumping it into a CVS/SVN server.
>
>There isn't a released C2Ada on sf.net.
>
>> "Simon Wright" should of archived the last Linux "c2ada" version 
>> instead of posting the zip file contents, because it is easy to alter a 
>> file and then post that altered file which can cause the project to 
>> become non-functional. 
>
>"should *have*", please.
>
>And it wasn't me, though it might have been. I'm a co-developer (& as
>it happens admin) on the project, special interest in making it
>portable (to Mac OS X, specifically).
>
>Not sure where the last c2ada archive came from, only glad jcreem took
>the initiative to make it visible so that interested parties can
>contribute.
>
>> Plus, just dumping a broken project without the original package cause 
>> the newbees to HATE Ada, because they can not use a project.  And all 
>> projects that are written in other languages should be only stored as 
>> archived and re-written in Ada before posting the project. Because any 
>> project that is written in standard Ada only language can be compiled 
>> and executed by all. But if more than two languages are use most people 
>> will just skip the project and move on.
>
>If I was rewriting this project I would might not use Ada, but I would
>certainly insist on a proper set of design documentation and code
>standards. It's very difficult to gather what most of the subprograms
>are for, what the pre- and post-conditions are etc, which makes it
>very hard to change. Part of that's down to C and C habits, of course.
>
>I think I would also abandon any attempt to make a generalised
>translator, instead let's just (!) go for an interface generator.
>
>>         Now, for the c2Ada, you should ask "Simon Wright" why he did
>> not insure that the c2ada project is full functional before he
>> posted it. Or have full documentation of how to build it.
>
>You don't seem to understand what SourceForge is for!