-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160
Michael G Schwern said the following on 10/30/03 2:36 AM:
<snip>
Hello Mister Schwern,
I'd like to keep going, but there's been no motion on any of the above. So... are you folks interested in testing and documenting Fink::*? Would you like me to continue?
my name is david Höhn (net alias Darian Lanx) and I am somewhat looking after the administrativa for Fink. I would be very glad to have you on board, since documentation and proper testing of the actual fink engine is something that we badly lack. There has been some great efforts by Mister Hansen and Mister Fujinaka to keep the man-pages and User documentation as well as the FAQ up-to date, yet the developer documentation for the code that fink intself user is nearly non existant.
If you would like to continue this important work, I would be more than happy to setup a roadmap of your goals and sync them with the Fink team, being your proxy. As Mister Reed said, we are very interested in additional patches to further improve fink and I am sure that you could be added to the development team as soon as the main developers know how you work and how you could improve Fink as a whole.
On a related note: how important is backwards compatibility? Some of theAccording to some including perl guru Mister "Schwartz" the classes and their model could use some work. Maybe even redoing them with something like Class::MethodMaker.
Fink::* function interfaces are a bit wonky and could do with some fixing.
For example, the tendency for classes to export functions. Lots of exported global variables where class methods should be used. Exported global variables not being distinguished from local variables with $Uppercase.
Inconsistent method names (new_with_* vs new_from_*). All basic stuff.
If you feel, that you have the time to improve the handling of that and thus improve fin itself, please do so.
Are you worried someone other than fink is using this code and do you care?I would say, that this is not really a concern we are currently looking at, yet it is important, especially to me, that we keeo the documentation availaible that someone COULD do so if they wanted to.
Can I go ahead and supply patches that will improve and change the module interface?As I said above, yes of course. According to some it is bitterly needed.
Furthermore the Dependency enhone seems to need a reqrite, yet no one is willing to touch it. Do you want to ?
Thank you for your efforts
- -d
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQE/oPzyiW/Ta/pxHPQRAxbrAKDS1QsN03oZ3f6Bg0GJuMHeVvfJDwCgjIwq aA2smvQS2NPZegTyyGRIK6A=RB8f -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? Does it help you create better code? SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help YOU! Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/ _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
