Re: Proposal: Replace scrollkeeper

["BJörn Lindqvist" <bjourne gmail com>]

On 6/19/07, Don Scorgie <Don scorgie org> wrote:
> Problems with scrollkeeper:
> * It's unmaintained
> * There are some outstanding bugs in it (we maintain 3 patches and apply
> them during jhbuild)
> * No facilities for fall-back languages
> * Install time registration is a pain
> * I'll stop there

You can't just stop like that! Let's get some real scrollkeeper hate
flowing and maybe it becomes easier to see why Rarian is advantageous
and needed.

> And now for the bad news:
> * It's currently lacking documentation.  Fate, it seems, is not without
> a sense of irony.

Lacking documentation is a killer. As the author of the software it is
your responsibility to ensure that there is decent documentation for
the software you propose others to use. That point really cannot be
stressed enough. Rarian is probably much better than scrollkeeper, but
without documentation (which scrollkeeper has) it's a no go for me.

> So there you have it.  Anyone want to volunteer an opinion, question,
> flame?

Trollish, (but I'm honestly curious :)) why did you write it in C when
there are many other languages around more suitable to the job?

--
mvh Björn