Daniel Bump wrote: > According to the quarry homepage and the last > messages in the quarry development list, Paul does > not intend to develop quarry further.
That's true, I don't think I will regain intereset in the project. For post-0.2 I planned to migrate to C++ for engine and Python for GUI, but never released changes I made. Might share if anyone is really interested. However, that is a huge refactoring and will only help if anyone is really interested in finishing it. > But quarry is rather good. It is too bad if it > is an orphan. It builds fine if you have the > gtk2 libraries installed (and some other > stuff). Should we distribute it with GNU Go? > > This would require Paul to assign the copyright to > the FSF. I don't mind though will it be really maintained? Is anyone willing to actually take it? Paul _______________________________________________ gnugo-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnugo-devel
