From: ············@gmail.com
Subject: MCL going open source?
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 15:26:02 +0000
Message-ID: <1192202762.307492.172700@v23g2000prn.googlegroups.com>

There's a post over on gmane about MCL possibly going open source:

"MCL 5.2 will soon be released as on open source project.
It is Unicode based. It is PPC only.
Perhaps this release will enable some combination of financial
and engingeering resources to provide an Intel implementation.
  Alice"

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.mcl.general/2500

• Re: MCL going open source? Brian Adkins
  • Re: MCL going open source? Rainer Joswig
• Re: MCL going open source? Slava Pestov
  • Re: MCL going open source? Geoff Wozniak
  • Re: MCL going open source? Rainer Joswig

From: Brian Adkins
Subject: Re: MCL going open source?
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 00:56:01 +0000
Message-ID: <1192236961.968757.286750@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>

On Oct 12, 11:26 am, ············@gmail.com wrote:
> There's a post over on gmane about MCL possibly going open source:
>
> "MCL 5.2 will soon be released as on open source project.
> It is Unicode based. It is PPC only. ...

Aren't all new Macs Intel based?

From: Rainer Joswig
Subject: Re: MCL going open source?
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 01:30:16 +0000
Message-ID: <joswig-056FD4.03301613102007@news-europe.giganews.com>

In article <························@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
 Brian Adkins <···········@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Oct 12, 11:26 am, ············@gmail.com wrote:
> > There's a post over on gmane about MCL possibly going open source:
> >
> > "MCL 5.2 will soon be released as on open source project.
> > It is Unicode based. It is PPC only. ...
> 
> Aren't all new Macs Intel based?

Yes.

(If you count OSX based iPhones and iPod touch. Then, no.
Those are ARM-based.)

From: Slava Pestov
Subject: Re: MCL going open source?
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 01:15:04 +0000
Message-ID: <1192238104.208805.138680@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com>

On Oct 12, 11:26 am, ············@gmail.com wrote:
>  Perhaps this release will enable some combination of financial
> and engingeering resources to provide an Intel implementation.

So they're hoping that by open-sourcing MCL, they will instantly gain
an army of high-quality, unpaid, volunteers willing to dive right into
10+ year old legacy code built on legacy APIs, and implement all the
missing features?

Classic mistake.

Slava

From: Geoff Wozniak
Subject: Re: MCL going open source?
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 02:17:14 +0000
Message-ID: <1192241834.700419.232370@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com>

On Oct 12, 9:15 pm, Slava Pestov <·····@jedit.org> wrote:
> So they're hoping that by open-sourcing MCL, they will instantly gain
> an army of high-quality, unpaid, volunteers willing to dive right into
> 10+ year old legacy code built on legacy APIs, and implement all the
> missing features?
>

Even If it's just a platoon, I won't be objecting.

From: Rainer Joswig
Subject: Re: MCL going open source?
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 01:27:58 +0000
Message-ID: <joswig-BD93F2.03275813102007@news-europe.giganews.com>

In article <························@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
 Slava Pestov <·····@jedit.org> wrote:

> On Oct 12, 11:26 am, ············@gmail.com wrote:
> >  Perhaps this release will enable some combination of financial
> > and engingeering resources to provide an Intel implementation.
> 
> So they're hoping that by open-sourcing MCL, they will instantly gain
> an army of high-quality, unpaid, volunteers willing to dive right into
> 10+ year old legacy code built on legacy APIs, and implement all the
> missing features?

are they?

> 
> Classic mistake.
> 

I guess you don't know what you are talking about - why post then?

> Slava