Re: GNUstep on Windows, "desktop" bundles...

[Larry Cow]

Alex Perez a écrit :

> Someone offered to build on the base installer, it might even have been 
> larry cow---I will check my mail archives and find who it was.
>  
I think it was me, but not before about a month. And I think we need to 
write some things down before facing the beast. Like: what should be 
servicized (gdomap, gdnc and gpbs, for now), where do we install things 
(c:/gnustep by default?), how do we interact with the start menu (a 
default action for .app "files" would be a nice thing), and so on.

Maybe this should be added on the wiki and brought to wider discussion 
(though I thinkmost gnustepers read this list)?

> IMHO there should probably just be one installer, with some radios for 
> developer/runtime and also base/gui, unless there is a size issue.
>  
Unless the thing gets too big, that's probably better.

> Yes I think it's an excellent idea in concept but it's one of hose things 
> you can really mess up if you don't do it properly. A desktop 
> bundle that did something akin to GTK-WIMP might be helpful to us (in fact 
> we could probably liberally borrow win32 code from this project for this 
> bundle).
>  
That's an idea, but it won't be much useful until we got some real 
theming support into GNUstep. I think nobody want's a "special win32" 
version of -gui, do we?

> Best thing would just be just to have GNUstep apps use windows default 
> colors under windows, like GTK-WIMP does.
>  
Yup. That shouldn't be the hardest part, and could improve the 
experience a lot.

> Under windows, horizontal-in-window is the paradigm, so I think we should 
> stick to it long-term if possible. Even NeXT did this.
>  
Still we should provide a way to use a "fully next-like" environment 
under windows, if the user wants. But the "integrated" version should be 
the default.

> well recently it seems somewhat broken again, but I am sure we can borrow 
> gtk win32 pasteboard code.
>  
And what will become of gpbs? If we could live with one less service to 
run... :)

> A whole other issue entirely. IMHO we should apply alexm's 
> no-gdomap-required patch so it's on by default under windows. gdomap 
> should maybe be run as a service under Win2k/XP since thats the closest 
> thing to a daemon that we have and if we dont do it that way then you 
> wouldn't be able to run a gnustep app as a non-administrative user, which 
> is bad bad bad.
>  
gdomap should surely be run as a service. Actually, I wonder if 
supporting win9x isn't useless, since it's about to be dropped, and 
since things will be far easier on NT stuff.

Yeah, I know, my father uses Win98 too, but I'm sure he won't use 
GNUstep anyt

> My $0.02
>  
We got $0.04! Hurray! \o/

--
Larry Cow