Re: SLY, a fork of SLY

Cyrus Harmon <[email protected]> writes:

>> Well the video is less than 4 minutes long and a only brief tour. I have
>> been working on this 6+ months and hundreds of commits.
> That’s not too surprising.

Precisely, it's not suprising that I can't sum up 6 months of work in a
4 minute demo.

>> While I personally disagree with you, the goal *is* to make SLY feel
>> familiar to SLIME users, which I think is a fantastic program.
>
> I’m not sure how you can disagree that the changes between SLY and
> slime are not readily apparent from watching the video. You may be
> intimately familiar with the differences, but your enumerating some of
> them would certainly be helpful to folks like me.

This is futile and of course it's obvious I can't disagree with your
personal perception. I disagree that SLY doens't bring anything new.

> If that’s an either/or, I’ll take the better description of the
> features before I try it. Thanks.

Have you seed the NEWS.md file? It's a bit sketchy
as was the screencast, but it might be what you want. Otherwise, suit
yourelf.

>>    Remember that to rewrite a program better is the sincerest form of code
>>    appreciation. When you can see a way to rewrite a part of SLIME better,
>>    please do so!
>
> I don’t disagree with the idea of forking, but there needs to be some
> rationale for the fork. So far I’ve seen defense of the act of forking
> but neither a description of the motivation for the fork nor a summary
> of the benefits to the user for using the forked version.

I've given you an answer: I would not find the freedom to make these
changes to SLIME. What is hard to understand there? Mind you, if
maintained a 10+ old program, I would not give such vast freedom
away. But fortunately, free software does give me that freedom.



João