Re: Fwd: GNU VCG
Left in full, because I know someone who had tried to maintain VCG.
He contacted the author, so maybe he will have important advice to
| --- Akim Demaille <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
| > >>>>> "James" == James Michael DuPont <email@example.com> writes:
| > James> Dear All, I am ccing you on this because you were involved in
| > James> the discussion with the VCG and the uglified sources.
| > Thanks for the pointer, but I'm going to start with a stupid
| > question:
| > do we want to maintain VCG instead of lobbying for Graphvisz?
| I my opinion : Yes, we do.
| Please do lobby for Graphviz, I dont think you will get it untill they
| feel threatened by vcg.
| There are some who say that GraphViz will becode GPL, and when it does,
| I will use it. Until then we should work on vcg.
| Also graphviz is only powerful if people support it, if the users have
| a free alternative, then they might choose (gnu)vcg. The issue is that
| lots of people are contributing to graphvis, they should contribute to
| We should parse the dot, dotty and other files as well. Then we can
| provide direct competition.
| > Did
| > RMS
| > say something about this issue (the format that GNU programs should
| > output)?
| He said that we should not output files, but produce results for users.
| Dont dump the programs memory into xml, but provide a service that is
| usefull. Every file allows anyone to use it. The more you output the
| less free software will be produced.
Sorry, but I don't understand what you mean. My question is: does RMS
ask for VCG output instead of dot output.
| James Michael DuPont
| Do you Yahoo!?
| Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More