Distributed RVS, Darcs, tech love

[Lew]

Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> Lew wrote:
>>> very
>>> different. Having a dead - i mean end of development line software
>>> like TeX - and
>>
>> Based on what do you call it "dead end".  It's used, it's outlasted 
>> many other flashes in the pan, it does what its users require.  You 
>> will need evidence for such a claim.
> 
> According to wikipedia the last version is from december 2002.
> 
> That level of activity could be considered dead.
> 
> It would for almost any other software. Tex has some
> "absolute" over it, so I am not sure normal software
> practices apply.
> 
> But you could argue based on that.

No, you present good evidence that TeX is a dead end.  It still doesn't 
support the claim llothar wrote:
>> Depends. I would call Knuth as one of the worst programmers. 

Plenty of brilliant programmers have written software that is no longer used 
(except in legacy use cases).  Good software, too.  I suppose what I was 
reacting to was the notion that TeX was a dead end at the time Knuth came up 
with it, and that that somehow invalidated the accomplishment of coming up 
with TeX.

The fact that it is still in use even five years after cessation of 
development does mitigate the "dead end" assessment at least potentially.

-- 
Lew