Fri, 27 Mar 1998 12:03:20 -0800 (PST)
>Date: Fri, 27 Mar 1998 20:29:33 +0100
>From: Rainer Joswig <email@example.com>
>Subject: Re: Lisp Machines
>At 11:05 27.03.98 -0800, Mike McDonald wrote:
>> I think I'd prefer CLIM to Composer. It's more of an "open" standard
>>than Composer is. But by no means do I think CLIM is THE windowing
>Composer is a collection of tools for the development system.
Whoops! Sorry, I got confused with their Common Windows stuff.
>> I think CMUCL would be the longer term base. In the meantime, use
>>either ACL or CMUCL. A lot of the stuff that needs to be written can
>>be done so in pure CL.
>At LUGM 98 Franz agreed to provide an implementation (in binary
>form) of CLIM 2 for Linux ACL. It will be available under
>the same terms as ACL for Linux (free for non commercial use).
>A friend of mine already got the CLIM source from Franz
>for doing this port to Linux (plus Motif).
I guess I can stop my work on implementing CLIM then. The only problem is
the license for ACL for Linux has expired (even though Franz is still letting
people download it).
Does your friend need help porting CLIM?
>So Linux users will have a quality CL and CLIM implementation
>to start hacking applications and an environment.
I can't wait!
>Others can write a free version of CLIM.
Maybe later after I play with Franz's implementation.