Re: State of the BEEP

I don't think I'd say beepcore-c is PERMANENTLY dead.  Maybe just
sleeping.  It does do a lot of things well and has a promising structure
for real applications down the road, if it manages to get more attention
to performance and threading issues.  It needs more resources more than it
needs to be thrown out -- it seems obvious to me that a general-purpose
and unencumbered C implementation is critical to BEEP's ultimate success.  
I have considered looking at RoadRunner but was a bit in doubt as to its
current status and advantages/disadvantages relative to beepcore-c; and I
am already up and running on beepcore-c.

I have been using it in a real application, and have managed to work 
around a number of small problems; I am interested in helping to improve 
it down the road (though I don't have CVS access and am really focused on 
just a few parts of the source tree).

I think another key lack is in the area of documentation and examples.  
They both exist, but fall far short of what is needed to write a real
application using it without a great deal of help from the likes of Mssrs.  
Mills and New.

FWIW there has been a fair amount of discussion at times on this mailing
list at the times when I was actively working on using beepcore-c in my
application ;^)  But that probably doesn't constitute critical mass.

-------------------------------------------------------
-- David C. Niemi           Adeptech Systems, Inc.   --
-- Reston, Virginia, USA    http://www.adeptech.com/ --
-------------------------------------------------------



-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration
See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn