[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Release schedule

From: Philippe C . D . Robert
Subject: Re: Release schedule
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:52:39 +0200

On Tuesday, April 1, 2003, at 02:49 AM, Chris B. Vetter wrote:
On Tue, 1 Apr 2003 01:41:07 +0100 (BST)
Nicola Pero <address@hidden> wrote:
vaguer to prevent users from being upset - I know OPENSTEP
compatibility is easier, but it's also pretty irrelevant as few
OPENSTEP systems are in use today, while Cocoa compatibility, while
more difficult, is much more relevant, as there are a lot of Cocoa
systems around.
Most users interested in compatibility are interested in Cocoa

You're absolutely right, but again: What good is Cocoa compatibility, if
that compatibility stands on wonky legs?

Why do you say so? GNUstep seems to be pretty stable, and where it is not, patches are welcome. Moreover adding classes which originate from Apple and not from the OpenStep specs does not automatically imply that it is bad stuff (although I agree that not all new classes are that impressive ... ) nor that it impacts the quality of the GNUstep implementation.

So to me the basic question here is do we want to fork or not. If we do, then I am fine with that, but it has to be made clear, and if we don't then we have to make sure that we come up with something which is as close to the commercial side of OpenStep (which is Cocoa in these days) as possible.

Philippe C.D. Robert

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]