On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 02:04:51PM +0100, RaphaÃl Quinet <quinet@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Note that I am not engaging in any kind of Perl-bashing here: Perl is my
Indeed, you aren't. However, you get a lot of things wong:
> - Gimp-Perl is broken and is not maintained
Well, I don't know of anything like "gimp-perl is broken". I think that
build problems that are due to people using the wrong compiler (like on
irix), or problems with gtk-perl (that I am still not aware of) do not
warrant such wording as "gimp-perl is broken".
Also, gimp-perl not being maintained is news to me. Who claims this?? I
was under the impression that I was the maintainer, and I certainly still
maintain it. Where do you have this "gimp-perl is not maintained"? Or has
the maintainer silently changed without the maintainer knowing it?
I really wonder what is going on here, but there is a great deal of
confusion and misinformation going on...
--
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg@xxxxxxxx |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|
