Message-ID:	<37CAF0EC.D2EB98F@pallen.dabsol.co.uk>
Date:	Mon, 30 Aug 1999 22:00:28 +0100
From:	Peter Allen <P DOT Allen AT pallen DOT dabsol DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language:	en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Can we vote on letting RSXNTDJ rest in peace?
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 990829143818 DOT 9438l-100000 AT is>
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 27 Aug 1999, Johan Venter wrote:
> 
> > I don't want to "withdraw" it from the Net, I never said that. I'd merely
> > like to see it fixed (which I would do myself if there wasn't the underlying
> > problem of me not having a full understanding of how it works).
> 
> The *real* question here (IMHO) is this: is RSXNTDJ a technically
> sound way to allow people to develop Win32 programs?
> 
> If the answer to this is NO, and somebody can present the arguments to
> back it up, then I agree that we should recommend that people look
> elsewhere.
> 
> But if RSXNTDJ is a good solution, and all it needs is some work on
> getting its installation easier for the uninitiated, then the Right
> Thing to do is to take over its maintenance, not to boycot it.  This
> is how things are done in the Free Software world: if the previous
> maintainer is unable or unwilling to support a good package, someone
> else should stand in and take over.

Although I agree with this in principal, there is a problem in _this_
case as RSXNTDJ cannot be distributed as an incomplete package due
to the licence.  Obviously the work can still be done, although the 
modifications are going to have to be distributed as a patch for
the original zip, unless Rainer (the (current) maintainer agrees to
orphan the project.

			Peter Allen

- Raw text -