Re: "gnuplot development" page on the revised SourceForge layout

[Ethan A M. <merritt@u.washington.edu>]

On Thursday 12 January 2006 06:54 am, Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote:
> Ethan A Merritt wrote:
> 
> > This seems misleading to me.  There is no
> > 32-bit restriction in the code, 
> 
> No intentional one, sure.  But as a matter of fact the 16-bit builds 
> haven't worked for quite a while now

Heh. I wasn't even thinking of 16-bit.
To me it read like a warning that the code wasn't 64-bit safe.

> > and the focus is not on MS Windows no matter how you look at it.
> 
> Ours isn't, but if you look at what the users have "voted with their 
> feet", their message is quite clear:  The win32 binary packages have 
> seen about as many downloads as the source and all other binary packages 
> combined.

I question that interpretation of the download stats.
Downloading a binary is about the only way Windows users can get the
package at all. On the linux side, gnuplot is included as a regular
part of every major distribution.  Really the only people who need to
download from SourceForge are the ones interested in building the cvs
version.

-- 
Ethan A Merritt
Biomolecular Structure Center
University of Washington, Seattle 98195-7742