Re: Some random thoughs and questions on the future of GNUstep

[Nikolaus Waxweiler]

> There would still be maintenance, I'm afraid. Just like there is  
> maintenance with gcc that has to be done. Maybe we could get some nice  
> features with less effort but there'd still need to be maintenance.

Yes, but less maintenance. GNUstep Make doesn't just build application and  
framework bundles but also normal libraries and such. The maintenance on  
an external build tool (CMake was just the next best example I found)  
would be limited to the bundles part and other specific needs for GNUstep.

> Application, library and framework authors are free to use whatever  
> build configuration tool they wish. Turns out that it is rarely needed.

It's a free bonus that comes with the less-maintenance thingy :)

> As for "generates files for Windows-native build tools, making Windows  
> developers' lives a bit easier" you don't seem to realise that gcc is  
> the only Objective-C compiler available. It does a pretty good job and I  
> don't believe there is any compelling reason to move away from it.
> Windows native build tools won't help. Besides which, there is the  
> freedom issue.

I know, but I was thinking more along the lines of giving devs the ability  
to use their favorite code editor on their platform. Who knows, this might  
make things easier for people wanting to help out GNUstep but scared off  
by not being able to do it comfortably. GCC would still be used in the  
background.