Re: FOSDEM and beyond (next stable release of base)

[Fred Kiefer]

Am 15.02.2010 19:20, schrieb Niels Grewe:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 05:23:03PM +0000, Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote:
>> On 14 Feb 2010, at 14:53, David Chisnall wrote:
>>> Do we have a list somewhere of what is still to do towards this
>>> goal?  I'm not a huge fan of the concept of feature-parity releases,
>>> because I'd rather have classes from 10.6 that I do use than classes
>>> from 10.4 that I don't use, but if there's a list somewhere of what
>>> is still missing / incomplete in terms of compatibility then it
>>> would make it easy for people to work on small contributions (and
>>> give me something to do when I am bored and unmotivated). 
>>
>> I don't think there *is* such a list.
>> And actually, base may be as close to 10.5 as 10.4
>> Probably we could do with some sort of compatibility table (perhaps on
>> the wiki) showing what classes we implement and which of the Apple
>> releases they correspond to.
> 
> I recall that, for last year's GSOC, somebody proposed writing some tool
> to compare the Cocoa and GNUstep header files to find out about our
> basic coverage for any given 10.x API. This might be leaning out of the
> window a bit, but I think this could probably be done quite easily by
> using the frontend parts of clang (perhaps one could even tweak Gorm's
> Objective-C header parser for that purpose). Maybe this could still be a
> worthwhile task for someone sufficiently motivated…

Comparing the headers is only half the task. We often have empty methods
in the implementation file.
For gui I started a list over the weekend. Just for the first ten
classes I needed two hours, but I may have looked a bit to much into the
details.
We really should put such a list into the wiki and work concurrently on it.