On Saturday 17 September 2005 01:20, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Friday 16 September 2005 06:20 pm, Mark Loeser wrote: > > Since we currently have language herds for other languages such as Ada, > > Perl, and Java, I don't think C++ should be any different. > > it is different, but i dont mind the idea of having a bunch of C++ experts > looking over a bunch of packages which otherwise may be neglected
And that's the point I see in as well - having some central point for our C++ experts/freaks. Of course, a c++ herd would not just be like ADA/Java IMO. Though, I vote FOR such a herd (and would like to join anyway) > > dev-libs/STLport (no-herd, vapier?) > > vapier/toolchain > > > dev-libs/fampp2 (no-herd, vapier) > > dev-libs/ferrisloki (no-herd, vapier) > > dev-libs/libferrisstreams (no-herd, vapier) > > dev-db/stldb4 > > generally i dont need help with these as the upstream author is a pretty > cool guy and gets back to me :) > -mike but having some backup is always the safer way, in case some of us is AFK for some unobvious reasons and a security patch is to be injected. Regards, Christian Parpart
pgpUVooVe8STE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
