gnustep-dev
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Changing gui->AppKit, base->Foundation... etc...


From: Gregory Casamento
Subject: Re: Changing gui->AppKit, base->Foundation... etc...
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 20:18:08 -0500

The names can change as a first step.  Then we can start refactoring.
That being said u don't think that simply having some things in base
which are not strictly foundation is a good argument not to change it.
  After all, when it's installed we install the headers under
Foundation, all I'm talking about here is changing the directory name
in the repo.  :)

GC

On Thursday, November 18, 2010, Truls Becken <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 21:24, Gregory Casamento wrote:
>
>> I would like to change the names of these things to things that both
>> Cocoa and OpenStep developers are more familiar with.   It would be
>> nice to have them as Foundation/AppKit and etc.   This would make it
>> easier to talk about GNUstep with people without having to constantly
>> say "base, GNUstep's version of Foundation" and the like.
>>
>> I'm working on a patch to make this happen, but I would like to know
>> if anyone has any misgivings about this before I commit it.
>
> This question was brought up two months ago as well. David then
> argued that base is not *just* Foundation.
>
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:29, David Chisnall wrote:
>
>> I think I'd like to see -base and -gui remain the names for the projects,
>> but not for the frameworks.  -base should include Foundation and
>> CoreFoundation, -gui should include AppKit and UIKit (and maybe
>> CoreGraphics), and both should include Additions.
>>
>> I wouldn't like to see -base renamed Foundation, because that implies
>> that it just implements Foundation - I have a fair amount of code that
>> depends on GNUstep stuff that won't work with another Foundation
>> implementation, but will work with -base.
>
> I guess if base and gui are renamed Foundation and AppKit, then the
> additions should be made separate frameworks so that using the
> standard names actually *does* show exactly what they include. This
> is probably not so easy to do, though? In a perfect world, it would then
> be possible to compile the additions on OS X to run code on Cocoa
> that uses GNUstep specific APIs.
>
> -Truls
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnustep-dev mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
>

-- 
Gregory Casamento - GNUstep Lead/Principal Consultant, OLC, Inc.
yahoo/skype: greg_casamento, aol: gjcasa
(240)274-9630 (Cell)



reply via email to

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