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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,c56a86f3a4e16d06 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Stephen Leake Subject: Re: Containers with Ada Date: 2000/11/21 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 696340841 References: <8v8pii$dvo$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <3A19172D.ACCA08BB@earthlink.net> <3A1AAFDE.1FABDD6B@home.com> <3A1AE30E.C57724E8@home.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: dscoggin@cne-odin.gsfc.nasa.gov X-Trace: skates.gsfc.nasa.gov 974846008 29461 128.183.220.71 (21 Nov 2000 22:33:28 GMT) Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Mime-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.6 NNTP-Posting-Date: 21 Nov 2000 22:33:28 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-11-21T22:33:28+00:00 List-Id: "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" writes: > > > Perhaps a better solution for open source packages is to distribute > > exactly the version you test with (which you may have patched), with > > the caveat that users who use other versions are on their own. > > Certainly, that is one solution. For large packages like florist however, > distributing that with a small application goes against the grain, especially > for the user who downloads with 56k modems. Hmm. If they have the same version, they don't have to download your copy. If they don't, they can either try it with a different version, or download your copy. I don't see how they are worse of than if you did not provide a copy. Ah, maybe you thought I meant the packages should be bundled in your zip file; probably not. > > > I would hope you would make an effort to contribute fixes and upgrade > > to later versions, but there's really no need to require your users to > > do that on their own! > > You don't specifically indicate what I should perform "fixes and upgrade > to later versions" for, but I'll assume that you mean my own contributed > applications. Sorry, I wasn't very clear. For example, if you distribute an app that works with Florist 1.1, but breaks with Florist 1.2, you should either upgrade your app to work with Florist 1.2, or fix Florist 1.2, whichever seems more appropriate. > My goal for written applications, is to be the "May Tag repair man". I want to > be able to move onto _NEW_ projects, since time is a limited resource. If I > must keep revisiting an application that does not need enhancing, just to > make it compile and work again, I get rather annoyed (when the change is > seemingly unnecessary). > > It's an imperfect world, so I accept the reality that changes are sometimes > required. But IMHO, it should be possible most of the time to build applications > without making a career out of it ;-) Yes, I totally agree. I'm working on Windex (a binding to Win32), and for now I feel free to change the user API, because I know it's pretty far from right. But at some point, it has to freeze, and just live with any imperfections. -- -- Stephe