Re: ANN: Basil -- Internet Message (email) and MIME library for Ada v 1.0

google1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 writes:
> Ludovic, not to offend *you* but I've not seen any evidence
> on this thread that you don't want to offend me. It seems that
> is all you've tried to do.

I'm sorry you feel that way.  Please accept my apologies.

> Yes, a library that has been in
> development for six months does not compare to gcc, nor other
> projects that have been around for many years, some with
> cor****ate backing. But considering the central thesis of your
> argument is a belief that Basil doesn't have a right to exist
> as a separate package, I think most would consider 10k SLOC
> as being past the threshold where a piece of software can be
> written off as trivial.

I do think a 10 kSLOC library has a right to exist as a package (and I
proved it in my last post by asking for someone to step forward as a
packager) and I know for a fact that 10 kSLOC is non-trivial (I've
written several such programs myself in the past and I'm proud of
them, as I'm sure you are rightfully proud of your work).  I only
suggested that a 10 kSLOC library might benefit from networking or
critical-mass effects when combined with, or distributed along, other
programs and libraries with which it cooperates by design (rather than
by accident).  This, not only in terms of functionality but also in
terms of user base and developers sup****ting it.

As Ada maintainer for Debian, I also tend to think in whole-system
terms (i.e. grandiose plans for large collections of packages that
work well together).  I think this explains why I may have come across
as looking down on your work, which I wasn't and am not.  Again,
please accept my apologies for that.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.