[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re[2]: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality co
From: |
Manuel Guesdon |
Subject: |
Re[2]: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control) |
Date: |
Fri, 24 Oct 2003 00:26:09 +0200 (CEST) |
On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:31:23 +0200 Helge Hess <helge.hess@opengroupware.org>
wrote:
>| > I do not agree because you will not find many Mac OS X apps which only
>| > rely on Cocoa and this GNUstep cannot be used for porting. I am
>| > thinking of CoreFoundation, Carbon, Quicktime, WebCore, the security
>| > stuff, Apple Scripts and so on... Besides why would anyone be
>| > interested in a GS port if there is no real environment to run GS
>| > apps?
>|
>| I absolutely agree. GNUstep might be good for *Linux* (or BSD or
>| whatever free system) developers who sooner or later intend to port to
>| MacOSX, but not for the reverse.
I don't agree :-)
Personally, I don't care about MacOSX but I like xStep API. When I've heard
about NeXT
something like 10 years ago, I've found this was very superior to windows
development APIs.
Now, after having used Borland, MFC, php, and lots of thing, I really
appreciate
GNUstep and *nix . I don't have interest in Mac OS X or windows _today_. May be
tomorrow
or the day after tomorrow...
>| >> Yes, I see the intention of a NeXTstep remake. I would love that. The
>| >> moment GS will have a decent ProjectBuilder (including Editor,
>| >> Class-Browser and GDB integration) I will leave MOSX. For me then
>| >> just EOModeler and WebObjectsBuilder would be missing.
>|
>| Notably NeXTstep never had such a great ProjectBuilder, Class-Browser,
>| etc. It was always pretty much bare bones. PBX is a bit better but
>| still not comparable to "real" IDEs like Eclipse or (duck)
>| VisualStudio.
Yes, Visual Studio is really a great tool (may be the only good thing from
microsoft :-)
I've used PB on windows and Mac OS X but I really prefer xemacs and xterm..
>| Well ... whether Windows is important basically comes down to what the
>| "GS project" is. Philip sees GS as EOF+WO and in this case I fully
>| agree, Windows is absolutely crucial. All successful Web development
>| environment run and need to run on Windows, this is true for PHP, Zope,
>| MySQL, J2EE, etc.
Well, I thing about projects for which I'd be interested in having GNustep
running on Unix
_and_ Windows.
But It's not a need for everyone. If you have to deploy on unix and you can
develop on unix,
there's no need for windows port.
Now, we have a solid base library,....
Next, some people need/want/like desktop stuff, some others web stuff, windows
porting...
I think people working on GNUstep have very different interests. I can't tell
one is better than the
other and I think the whole project progress.
Different people, different projects, different needs, interests and
priorities...
BTW, I'd really like to know why people here are interested and (may be) work
on GNUstep. May be
it could help to understand each others :-)
Manuel
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), (continued)
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Philippe C . D . Robert, 2003/10/22
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Philip Mötteli, 2003/10/22
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Philippe C . D . Robert, 2003/10/23
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Philip Mötteli, 2003/10/23
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Philippe C.D. Robert, 2003/10/23
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Philip Mötteli, 2003/10/23
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Philippe C . D . Robert, 2003/10/23
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Patrick Coskren, 2003/10/23
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Chris B. Vetter, 2003/10/23
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Helge Hess, 2003/10/23
- Re[2]: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control),
Manuel Guesdon <=
- Re: Re[2]: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Helge Hess, 2003/10/23
- Re: Re[2]: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Pascal J . Bourguignon, 2003/10/23
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Philippe C.D. Robert, 2003/10/24
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Helge Hess, 2003/10/26
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for qualitycontrol), Jeff Teunissen, 2003/10/26
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Philip Mötteli, 2003/10/25
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Jason Clouse, 2003/10/26
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Philip Mötteli, 2003/10/26
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Pete French, 2003/10/26
- Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control), Philip Mötteli, 2003/10/26