>> There's nothing wrong with mk. It's just that >> I highly doubt we could get a separate set of >> mkfiles included in the Go distribution. > > Have you tried? It's a non-invasive change, and once they are set up it's > unlikely they will need to be updated often.
I think Anthony is on the right path on this point, in that I've had to update a couple of mkfiles in the recent past because I had overlooked changes to the coresponding Makefiles. Not many, but they do trigger additional maintenance problems. The only alternative option I would pick is to merge the Go release into the Plan 9 (and nix) distribution - mkfiles and all - then use a mechanism analogous to mine to keep them in sync. The unsuspecting public would never see the hard backroom effort. In my fantasies, I see p9p as a stepping stone in that direction. Lastly, my congratulations to Anthony, if there is any way I can assist in merging the code, I'd be happy to help (just don't ask me to install Python and Mercurial on my Plan 9 system - mind you, I'll probably have to do so, sooner or later :-(. Lucio.
