On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 11:40 PM, John Wiegley
<address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>> Chong Yidong <
address@hidden> writes:
> Look, no one is saying that you're not allowed to improve the Mac OS part of
> the Nextstep port, or that the GNUstep part must must work exactly as well
> as the Mac OS part. On the contrary; if you want to help improve it, go
> right ahead.
And I concur. Perhaps someone can explain to me the downside of having Yamamoto place his tree as a sibling to the ns tree. I do not understand why this would be a bad thing. On the other hand, having both side by side will undoubtedly allow me to figure out much more about (and more easily) what is going on and why one version is better than the other, etc. It just seems intuitively obvious that having both sit side by side will increase interest that will likely improve both. At least for a while. Over the long haul I suspect most development will favor one over the other. My preference is to give them both a chance to thrive together.
That said, I use the ns tree daily and love it. The fonts look pretty good to me. I click on the green maximize button (twice) and get a full screen experience that works for me. Speed has never been an issue. So I'm scratching my head over where the pain point is in the ns code. Maybe I should just fix a bug or two, if only to start feeling Yamamoto's pain wrt the quality of the coding experience inside the ns tree.
Someday, when it is trivially easy to build the Yamamoto code, I will try that instance too just to see the differences and compare the approaches.
-pmr