Per Jessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Aengus wrote: > >> Analog has been user modified to meet minor needs, > > User-modifications are the first signs of a beginning fork. Why not a > 6.01 release instead? > Has anyone collected these user-mods into a combined patch?
One of the core concepts behind Analog is it's cross platform funxtionality. Most of the user modifications that I recall coming up on this list are platform specific tweaks - to be honest, there haven't been many of them. The only other cross-platform modification that I recall is the one to add Windows Vista to the list of recognizes Windows variants. You already found a copy, and I've pointed to the list archives where I documented the process for Windows users to compile the change for themselves. >> 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. > > How about reporting on compression ratios, browser language settings > and perhaps ssl settings? > Maybe introducing autoconf into the build? (I think I did some work on > that already). > Improved default config with common browsers and robots preconfigured. > > (personally I also think the config syntax and semantics could do with > an "upgrade"). There are a couple of syntactic quirks that, with hindsight, might be usefully reworked, but I'm not sure that the benefits of making "FILEINCLUDE robots" work the same way as "FILEINCLUDE pages" is enough to provide the momentum for a fork. > A fork is not necessary, but as Stephen never did invite other > maintainers/developers, it seems to be only way forward. I don't think Stephen was exactly beating down requests to join the development team! Analog is a pretty mature application, and most of the people with the skills to help focussed on "helper apps", that enhance the functionality of Analog, without modifying Analog itself (Report Magic is probably the biggest, though the various DNS resolver tools are the other obvious area where potential functionality within Analog was sacrificed to maintain the maximum cross-platform compatibility. The very structure of Analog makes helper apps a good method to add functionality, without modifying Analog. This was Stephens response to why he didn't release an "official" patch to include Vista: http://lists.meer.net/pipermail/analog-help/2006-November/020028.html I certainly have no objection to a fork - I doubt that Stephen has. I'm just not sure that there's sufficient demand for a fork to maintain the necessary momentum. 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 +------------------------------------------------------------------------
