Re: XML idea

[Alexander Malmberg]

> Alex Perez wrote:
> > As much as I would personally like to see this happen, it likely never
> > will for a variety of reasons. First of all, this gives the impression
> > that PortabilityKit is part of the GNUstep project, which it is not. Maybe
> > a good compromise might be a script that sits in the root of core/ which
> > would auto-get portabilityKit via CVS. This could present a few lines of
> > test saying that it is not an official part of GNUstep, use, at your own
> > risk, we dont support it, blah blah blah...Would any GNUstep core members
> > care to comment on what they think of this idea?

Having a script that creates a 'combined tree' seems sensible (so you'd
configure and 'make;make install' in make, base, gui, back, and
PortabilityKit; ./compile-all could do it automagically after checking
that the directory exists).

Fred Kiefer wrote:
> As much as I like to see diversity, I really don't like the idea of
> forking GNUstep.

PortabilityKit doesn't look like a fork; it's a separate library that
implements things that GNUstep doesn't/won't.

- Alexander Malmberg