Hi! On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 06:50:34PM +0100, Ga?tan Quentin wrote: > Here is an explanation from the arts author, saying, in a few words, that his > arts project is a shit because technologie choices were bad, and he doesn't > want to continue development on it any more.... : > http://www.arts-project.org/doc/arts-maintenance.html
I am sorry if I made the impression that I think that aRts is shit. That was not my intension. To quote myself : I wouldn't even say that aRts has no shining aspects of its design; : while this text may not really emphasize the strengths it has, I still : think it does quite some things quite well. Its just that I find other : ideas more promising to work on right now. To make a comparision: if I were an architect, after building two solar power plants, I might choose to build a water power plant, and I could point out clearly to the advantages water power plants have over solar power plants (such as producing power even if the sun doesn't shine). But that wouldn't mean that I think solar power plants are shit. It might just be that I think that my work as an architect would be for the time being better spent on building a water power plant, than another solar power plant. Cu... Stefan -- Stefan Westerfeld, Hamburg/Germany, http://space.twc.de/~stefan _______________________________________________ Arts mailing list [email protected] http://space.twc.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/arts
