Hi, "Andy Tai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think it is well agreed that the current tla's strong ties to "certain > aspects" (but not all) of the POSIX environment is a weakness and to work well > on Microsoft Windows is a desired feature for Arch 2.0 and Tom's prototype > clearly shows that. GNU Arch is/should be targeting the GNU system. Therefore, portability to other systems can arguably be an advantage, but I don't think it should be a strong requirement. So, if Windows-portability has an negative impact on the design, then I'd reject it. If it doesn't, then we can make it part of the plan. That's roughly the "official" GNU policy [0]. For instance, it seems that `revc' could potentially work fine on Windows because it doesn't rely on any Unix/GNU idiosyncrasy. OTOH, `tla' builds on the ability to use long paths, hard links, and so on, which Windows doesn't provide. Thus, maybe we should not worry too much about Windows for `tla' because porting it there may require unacceptably constraining the design. Thanks, Ludovic. [0] http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#System-Portability _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
