On Friday, August 31, 2007 6:49 AM [EDT],
Per Jessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Eric Gorr wrote:
Since Analog 6.0 is the last version, I was wondering if people had
any opinion on what the next 'best' analyzer is or will be?
I find it difficult to believe that no-one has picked up where Stephen
left off - are there no developers on this list? I did some work (XML
output) on analog myself about three years ago, but right now I just
haven't got the time to get involved.
There isn't really much of a learning curve - the package is just the
source code and a Makefile. There's no SVN or autoconf to make things
complicated :-)
Even if an updated version couldn't be published at www.analog.cx,
someone could still create a fork and publish that.
Which comes first, the chicken or the egg? Do you start with a fork, or do
you start with unmet needs? Most forks occur because someone needs an
application to do something that it currently can't do. Analog has been user
modified to meet minor needs, but the occasional calls for functionality
that isn't in Analog (path tracking, or exit page reporting) aren't things
that would necessarily fall out of the processing that Analog already does.
Aengus
+------------------------------------------------------------------------
| TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list:
| http://lists.meer.net/mailman/listinfo/analog-help
|
| Analog Documentation: http://analog.cx/docs/Readme.html
| List archives: http://www.analog.cx/docs/mailing.html#listarchives
| Usenet version: news://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.analog.general
+------------------------------------------------------------------------
