Re: [9fans] Is the vanilla Plan 9 still alive?

[Kurt H Maier <khm@sciops.net>]

On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 08:34:32AM +0200, Lucio De Re wrote:
> We just got a mouthful from sl and you about the lack of explanation
> for the state  of the various plan 9 "distributions". It all smacks of
> expecting Da Vinci to update the Mona Lisa because somebody would
> prefer a high-rise landscape in the background and because someone
> actually did photoshop the Mona Lisa in that guise, but was not
> accepted as the most significant contributor to the painting.

I'm not really following the art analogy here, but nothing I've said on
this list is new.  It's all documented either on 9front.org or (more
frequently) in the manual, which comes with the operating system.  The
9front ISO also contains the complete mercurial history of 9front, but
does not include or refer to the 'ports' repo. 

Most of the developers of 9front don't use (or even like) the 'ports' 
repository.  As far as I know the software in it works on any Plan 9
system.  Regardless, I'll work with its maintainers to clarify the
non-relationship in the README file.

If you have any other suggestions for improving the state of things, let
me know.  

If I'm honest, I suspect most of 9fans doesn't really give a shit about
most of these issues.  If anyone did, they probably would have said
something before now, or done something to ameliorate any of them.
Instead, they only seem to show up when someone gets mad about something
else and then decides to air unrelated grievances -- which is a shame, 
because the sooner they're voiced the easier it is to fix things.  I'm
sure the performative outrage is much more gratifying in the moment.

If anyone wants anything fixed, I'm available for that.  If I have to
wait until someone whatabouts something else, that's fine too, it's just
slower.  Either way, I'll try.

khm