> * In message <20021024163511.55439.qmail@web12207.mail.yahoo.com>
> * On the subject of "Re: [Maxima] Re: maxima-local problems"
> * Sent on Thu, 24 Oct 2002 09:35:11 -0700 (PDT)
> * Honorable C Y <smustudent1@yahoo.com> writes:
>
> Sam, did you get a chance to look at the proposals for a new style of
> text startup for maxima? Would a recognition without the full banner
> be sufficient? Again we are happy to credit Clisp.
I think that if you build on top of another project,
your should not suppress their banner by default.
Credit here is secondary.
We can argue back and forth here forever: GCC-compiled programs do not
emit any "GCC banners", but GCC is just a compiler wile a CL is also a
runtime, but then GLIBC is the runtime for GCC and no "GLIBC banner" is
ever emitted, but then a LIBC is a standard component of any system and
they are all pretty much the same (give and take some - this is why,
BTW, GLIBC is under GNU LGPL and not full GNU GPL) while CLs are more
"unique", but then Perl scripts show no banner, but CLISP scripts show
no banner either - this is the different between interactive and batch
processing etc etc etc.
I am not really interested in this argument: you have a very strong
point and I do not think I will be able to convince you that I am
`right' and you are `wrong'. I doubt you will convince me either.
All I am saying is that _adding_ Maxima's banner to the CL's one
(instead of replacing it), and giving your users an option to turn both
off at the same time, is, IMHO, a nicer (= less conflict-prone) way to
handle this issue.
> that banner is rather distracting.
Do I smell politics here? <http://clisp.cons.org/faq.html#menorah>;
--
Sam Steingold (http://www.podval.org/~sds) running RedHat8 GNU/Linux
<http://www.camera.org>; <http://www.iris.org.il>; <http://www.memri.org/>;
<http://www.mideasttruth.com/>; <http://www.palestine-central.com/links.html>;
When you talk to God, it's prayer; when He talks to you, it's schizophrenia.