I believe adding entries to that list is the only reasonable thing
In that case I'd request that future entries in that list at least
include the clisp version being built.
to do. The rest sounds like full time jobs (maintaining DB, build
old versions etc.), nobody has time for that.
If there's a web interface to a DB that simply collects data from
people who volunteer it then there should be practically no work
It's important for practical applications that some known version of
CLISP still works with old OS.
I agree that's useful, but further information is also useful.
Generally you want to know the latest clisp version that you can build
on a given OS version, since you're using some OS version that you
don't want to change, and you'd like to use the most up-to-date clisp
version you can.
As I mentioned, my case was the opposite. I knew I wanted a
particular clisp version and it would have been worth while to know
which machines were capable of building it.
But the mailing lists archives are equally valuable, because they
give context and history, failure and success stories.
That tends to focus on the failures.
Also you have to read a lot of stuff in order to find out the answer.
The point of organizing the data is to be able to find the answer with
A possible intermediate point between the database and what we have
now would be a new mailing list specifically for build reports, where
people are encouraged to fill out a form.