[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Release schedule

From: Chris B. Vetter
Subject: Re: Release schedule
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 10:49:10 -0800

On Tue, 1 Apr 2003 20:29:08 +0200
Markus Hitter <address@hidden> wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 01.04.03 um 17:09 Uhr schrieb Tim Harrison:
> > No one is suggesting that adding NSToolbar, by itself, is going to 
> > make GNUstep unstable.  The problem is that GNUstep is unstable now,
> > and spending the time to track Cocoa will take time away from fixing
> > that instability.
> This implies a person not implementing NSToolbar would track down 
> instabilities instead. I don't think this is the case.

It is the case when that person is one of the "core developers",
like Adam or Alex.

> That's how I experience participians in public projects: Those brave 
> guys working enthusiatic on any part of the project, as long as it 
> belongs to the project, are rare. Most of them have some goal in mind 
> and are working towards a solution for it.


> > One of the things I'm concerned about is the uncertain wording of
> > the goals for GNUstep.
> That's because GNUstep users have so different goals? Some love it for
> the superior API, some for it's superior UI and some see it as a Cocoa
> clone for non-OS X. Which of them do you want to get rid of? Hopefully
> none.

No. But instead of just an overall goal, split it up into smaller steps.

  By release 2 - A complete Openstep implementation
  By release 3 - A complete Cocoa implementation

("complete" includes stable and working ;-)
At least then people know what they are getting. Currently, it's
downright confusing what we have and what's working (or not).

> > However, the general feeling (amongst anti-Cocoa-trackers, at least 
> > ;)) is that having a solid, non-changing base as a reference to work
> > from is extremely important.
> Sorry, I fail to see how following Cocoa whould conflict with that 
> goal? Cocoa's changes to existing API are minor, already implemented
> in GNUstep and will be even smaller in the future as Apple always had
> to provide some sort of backwards compatibility. Additions aren't
> changes. Am I wrong?

Yes and no.
Ever tried to compile with -DSTRICT_OPENSTEP or -DNO_GNUSTEP ? It won't.


reply via email to

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