Re: [avr-libc-dev] Adding (some) Procyon AVRlib functionalitytoavr-libc

[Joerg Wunsch]

As Weddington, Eric wrote:

> Regarding naming, here's another thought: Why does it even have to
> have a separate name? If it's part of avr-libc, then let it be that:
> just a part of avr-libc. The library that is built could be named
> 'libavr.a' and one links to it with '-lavr', but it's still
> avr-libc.

I think it makes sense to have a separate project name just for
"marketing reasons".  It is really added functionality which goes
beyond the current avr-libc scope, and I think it should be an
"opt-in" item rather than always be there.

Also, keeping it distinct allows for other development models.  One
thing that already has been mentioned is that it might ship as just
source code modules, rather than an object library.  It might also
feature a different organization of the documentation.

> We could have a separate mailing list to discuss development of it,
> but why do we have to?

Because perhaps not everyone subscribed to avr-libc-dev is interested
in participating in all the discussions about the new library.

-- 
cheers, J"org               .-.-.   --... ...--   -.. .  DL8DTL

http://www.sax.de/~joerg/                        NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)