Re: A packaging scheme...
On Thursday 30 September 1999, at 10 h 30, the keyboard of "Ean R .
Schuessler" <ean@novare.net> wrote:
> This is exactly analogous to, say, the selection of thread implementations
> for glibc 2.0. You are still free to use some other thread model if you care
> to, but the default one that most people write to is the one in glibc that
> is bound to the kernel threads.
OK, I get it. But the arbitration mechanism in glibc is clear: the maintainer of glibc decides what will be the default thread library and what will be left outside.
It means our packaging scheme would need a maintainer, to take such decisions. This job will require knowledge, diplomacy and authority.
Some cases are simple, like XML (there is only one implementation). Regexps will be more complicated.
Reply to: