Marco Baringer mb@bese.it writes:
i don't want to offend anyone's tastes but i find the common-lisp.net site a little plain. i tried to come up with something a bit more colorful:
http://www.bese.it/~segv/common-lisp.net/index2.html http://www.bese.it/~segv/common-lisp.net/index3.html
i don't like those two designs either, but hey, i gave it my best. if you like 'em, use 'em; if you hate 'em, ignore 'em; if this is really arrogant and presumptuos of me ... sorry.
It's ok. I don't like your designs either :-)
Design is always a matter of taste, so it is impossible to satisfy everyone. The current design is not meant to last 'till the end of times, btw.
- i've been following the project naming discussion on irc and admin@common-lisp.net, if i may: how many different rfc2833 implementations for common lisp are there? I think that as long as the names are discriptive (says he who calls his projects fiveam and arnesi) whatever people want should be fine. the existence of a project called rfc???? will at least push people to add features/improvements to that as opposed to using re-implementing it.
I slept over it, and decided that I don't think it is a problem to name things after the rfc, but maybe the authors want to reconsider, as few people start looking for things based on the rfc number. Probably cl-mime, or mime.lisp, or whatever, is a bit more descriptive.
...but I don't see any proplem with rfc???? names.
(and btw, what does 'arnesi' mean?)
Mario.