On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Massimo Belgrano <mbelgr...@deltain.it>wrote:
> Imo this not true > we have better release from confrontation of different opinion This sounds very well and also very easy to say until the point *you* have to spend those weeks fixing the *actual* problems. This isn't something virtual. For me - and I believe for many Harbour users - it's much more important to have a dynamic and portable core than maintaining heavy / plat spec libs with a lot of effort for historical or personal reasons. I've even deleted *my own* contributions in the past for similar reasons. We have tons of things to do anyway, so we should focus on what's relevant and stick to our original goals. The other thing: What is the problem with maintaining a lib _outside_ our repository? IMO _nothing_. In fact, we have very good quality 3rd party libs with active userbases, development teams, so I don't see why GTWVG couldn't live the same way. Granted, it won't get *automatic and free maintenance* from us, Harbour developers, but everyone who is interested can jump there and contribute, and we are here free to do more important things (or at not getting blocked by it), and GTWVG is free to decide about focuses, quality questions, devel decisions, release cycles and methods completely independently from ours. BTW, are you actually using GTWVG? -- Viktor
_______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
