Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site k.cs.cmu.edu Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!qantel!lll-crg!seismo!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!k.cs.cmu.edu!tim From: tim@k.cs.cmu.edu (Tim Maroney) Newsgroups: net.news.group Subject: Re: sources, not binaries Message-ID: <664@k.cs.cmu.edu> Date: Tue, 26-Nov-85 05:26:07 EST Article-I.D.: k.664 Posted: Tue Nov 26 05:26:07 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 29-Nov-85 08:30:47 EST References: <72@calma.UUCP> Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, Networking Lines: 25 Again, I think people are getting confused. Everyone agrees that net.sources.mac should have a lot more sources. However, being for sources is not the same thing as being against binaries. Binaries are an absolute necessity on the Mac, because of the proliferation of incompatible compilers and interpreters. Without binaries, most software for the Macintosh would be useless to most of us except as example code. To summarize: net.sources.mac should contain sources for a greater proprtion of the software distributed on it. However, binary distribution of ALL Macintosh software must also be continued, or the group is useless. By the way, I have just posted some 12,000 lines of source code to net.sources.mac, as I have been intending to do for weeks (but have been unable to because of hardware problems). I have an uncomfortable feeling that the main opposition to net.sources.mac is coming from Mac-haters, people who think the Mac is a worthless toy and anyone who thinks they're using it for real work is fooling themselves. If so, we'll see a cute double bind forming: "Look at these huge sources! How can we justify this since we don't use the silly things?", forming an exquisite counterpoint to the former "Without sources, the group is not fulfilling its mandate". We'll see.... -=- Tim Maroney, Professional Heretic, CMU Center for Art and Technology tim@k.cs.cmu.edu | uucp: {seismo,decwrl,ucbvax,etc.}!k.cs.cmu.edu!tim CompuServe: 74176,1360 | God is not dead; he just smells funny.