From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\)) From: Jeff Sickel In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 01:52:57 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <01534B2A-5537-4A2D-A5F0-195DB76EBD9F@corpus-callosum.com> References: To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Subject: Re: [9fans] Go port [was Re: Go and 21-bit runes (and a bit of Go Topicbox-Message-UUID: 92cee230-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Russ did release the Porting Policy which gives us a good benchmark. That said, getting the changes people have submitted to codereview rolled into the default branch so the builder will work is another issue all together. On Dec 4, 2013, at 1:20 AM, lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote: > It also means that the Plan 9 port will be decoupled from the > codereview system and in effect will be left to bitrot wherever it > will be maintained when that happens. >=20 > I consider that a disaster, others may think otherwise. Codereview has it=92s issues. For me, it=92s the inability to actual construct a query that works to return any CLs related to Plan 9, or anything for that matter. Could be that I=92m running a = non-supported browser when I=92m trying to pull up details. And I thought this = version of Chrome was the most recent=85