From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <ee9e417a05021709532c21ef3c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 12:53:24 -0500
From: Russ Cox <russcox@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Evolving rio / GUI development
In-Reply-To: <opsmcrpxsb3anw4g@tiitl.aprote.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <1073199218.20050217075014@mail.ru>
	<f06f9a065c4ce8898e54d8017db99eb5@granite.cias.osakafu-u.ac.jp>
	<1618372765.20050217191550@mail.ru>
	<opsmcqw51z3anw4g@tiitl.aprote.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0502171034450.19065@enigma.lanl.gov>
	<opsmcrpxsb3anw4g@tiitl.aprote.com>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 0b9f7aa2-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> My (somewhat sarcastic) comment was more referring to the probability
> that no excellent new idea will likely be unraveled here, so
> nothing will be (re-)implemented, either. Plan 9 has a strong intrinsic
> opposition to change; this is mostly good beacuse of obvious
> reasons. But some experimentation would'nt hurt. I just can't see the
> mechanism of this happening, short of reimplementing the whole shebang.

The mechanism is, and always is, someone writes code.
Of course, that's not nearly so easy as whining on 9fans.

Russ