Message-Id: <200006020807.LAA04872@alpha.netvision.net.il>
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 11:07:08 +0200
X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.1.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.5b
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Richard Dawe <richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com>
CC: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <3936DA62.9581F9CE@bigfoot.com> (message from Richard Dawe on
	Thu, 01 Jun 2000 22:49:22 +0100)
Subject: Re: netbd.h, sockets.h, in.h and types.h don't work
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1000601085256 DOT 17554C AT is> <3936DA62 DOT 9581F9CE AT bigfoot DOT com>
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> From: Richard Dawe <richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com>
> Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
> Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 22:49:22 +0100
>
> > Sorry, I cannot parse this.  Don't you agree that the development
> > environment will become larger?  And what's Microsoft got to do with
> > this?
> 
> I think we need to define the term "integration" here. AFAICT Eli and me
> think that you mean integration into djdev itself, whereas you are
> thinking about integration between two separate entities: djdev + library.
> The puzzling thing is that the second case is what we have today anyway -
> most of the network libraries do integrate with DJGPP, otherwise how would
> they work?

As we both know, adding a large body of code to djdev is quite a bit
more complex than simply releasing an add-on.

But I was referring to the sheer size of the distribution.  Adding a
large amount of code that most people don't use is something that
should be carefully considered.