Re: Ada Letters

[John McCormick <mccormick@cs.uni.edu>]

Ivan,

Ada Letters would welcome additional volunteers to assist in
maintaining the software reuse section.  Please send your suggetions
directly to Trudy.  Her e-mail address is given at the beginning of
her reuse column.

I agree with the need to delete the reference to Ada Home.  Other
comp.lang.ada readers have posted reasons to maintain the other
components you feel should be dropped.

I don't understand your reasoning for "SIGAda conferences ... a bad
service for Ada".  What would you like to change?  The call for
participation for SIGAda 2009 is now available on the SIGAda web
site.  Perhaps you could submit something to help move things in the
direction you desire.

John

On Feb 10, 10:00 am, Ivan Levashew <octag...@bluebottle.com> wrote:
> Have you ever looked into "Ada Software Reuse" sections? I'm a bit
> surprised.
>
> Things I'm not glad to see there [1]:
>
> Ada Home. Every normal Adaist has already denied this site [2]. It's a
> sin to mention it in the first order, isn't it?
>
> GNAVI. It is dead! Why not mention QtAda? Not that I was a great fan of
> Qt, but it would be definitelly a good service for Ada to mention QtAda.
>
> PragmAda Reusable Components. Aren't they broken on Ada 2005? Why not
> mention AdaCL instead (or in addition)?
>
> SIGAda conferences are supposed to be productive meetings, but in fact I
> see a bad service for Ada. Why are things being this way?
>
> [1] the latest onehttp://www.sigada.org/ada_letters/apr2008/Reuse-Components-April%2008...
> [2] AdaHome - A Persistent Problemhttp://groups.google.com/groups?threadm=hDsIj.36771%24J41.10422%40new...
>
> --
> If you want to get to the top, you have to start at the bottom