4 ms·

I guess what I meant was, most software projects eventually reach a point where they have to be burned down and rebuilt (or simply deprecated in favor of a youn

by _bxg1 8y ago

I guess what I meant was, most software projects eventually reach a point where they have to be burned down and rebuilt (or simply deprecated in favor of a younger project). Depending on the quality of the engineering it could be 5 years or 25, but it feels like an inevitability. These single-purpose GNU tools seem to be free of that phenomenon.

asveikau 8y ago
> most software projects eventually reach a point where they have to be burned down and rebuilt (or simply deprecated in favor of a younger project) Is it really that, or do new people just come along and rebuild the same thing again and again without firm understanding of the older thing? One approach would be to call GNU tools very exceptional and marvel at them (keep in mind its origins as a clone of older Unix stuff), but perhaps it's more appropriate to ask tougher questions of people operating in this other modality, that you are calling normal expectations.