[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: State of the 'Step
Re: State of the 'Step
Tue, 16 Feb 2010 13:02:40 +0100
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:188.8.131.52) Gecko/20091130 Thunderbird/3.0
The Debian folks actually do a pretty good job of maintaining an easily
installed workable group of GNUstep applications. I don't use them
because I want to modify some of the apps with my own icons and adjust
the UI using Gorm, also want to be able to install updated apps easily.
Debian changes the installation path so mixing and matching is a hassle.
I really like to not go through the hassle of installing/updating GNUstep
manually myself too. But what's really really bad with Debian is (I mean if you
go with sid/unstable, you really should get the latest tarball releases,
but the version there is heavily outdated). This really sucks. Especially
for people that build things upon that stuff. That would be at least me,
trying to make a nice showcase of GNUstep on a http://livecd.gnustep.org/
Not much I can do about it. Unfortunately it's not too easy to build all the
latest stuff as Debian packages, I failed trying so. So there's not but just
waiting for the new versions to get into Debian...
I wish there will be a new tarball release soon, so that version with the menus
for the apps that fit into Windows like menus/windows integrates better into
GNOME and KDE (for the people that use that).
btw, I miss Bean too, and Chess.app, and NetHack.app and...
I think it would be great if we could come up with a system to identify
applications that are known to build and run on a certain base/back/gui.
Perhaps it could be tied to the version of Startup so that a few weeks
before a new version of Startup is released it goes into to feature lock
giving Application developers a chance to certify their apps against
that version of Startup. Perhaps a numbering scheme like
"GWorkspace-0.8.7-cert-0.22.0.tgz" could indicate that this is the 0.8.7
version of GWorkspace and THIS tarball has been demonstrated to compile
and run on the default installation of Startup-0.22.0. It would of
course be best if more than one person tests the app. Then Etoile,
Debian, BSD, etc. could use those versions as a starting point to mod
for their distributions, of course passing any bugs and patches
upstream. Maybe GAP could host the certified version of the applications
if they were willing.
On 2010-02-15 22:26:33 +0100 Gregory Casamento
You're preaching to the choir here on this one. Any ideas how to make
that happen? I would love to get up to date packages everywhere.
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 3:39 AM, Ronald C.F. Antony
Even more to the point: unless there are simple GnuStep meta-packages
for the major BSD and Linux distributions that are reasonable
"click-install-run" easy, most of the effort going into GNUStep is
wasted, because except for a few nostalgic exNeXT users and a few
developers, nobody is going to use it.
I didn't have time to play with GNUStep for ages, but I keep
following the development from a distance, but think about it for a
moment: if KDE or something like it would require that level of
involvement just to get going, do you think it would have the sort of
adoption it has now?
On 14 Feb 2010, at 16:34, Fred Kiefer wrote:
Great to hear how much GNUstep software you are using. But being a
developer I am most interested in what didn't work :-(
Why did you have to abandon your attempt to compile GNUstep from SVN?
(We switched over from CVS years ago, if you really tried CVS then this
was a very old version of GNUstep)
And are there any interesting patches on the debian patch system for
GNUstep that didn't make it upstream?
Discuss-gnustep mailing list
Re: State of the 'Step, J. Jordan, 2010/02/16
Re: State of the 'Step, Dirk Olmes, 2010/02/15