[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Introduction, and Proposed GSFH.

From: Tim Harrison
Subject: Re: Introduction, and Proposed GSFH.
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 12:08:36 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.6) Gecko/20011120

Hi David and Stefan.

David Wetzel wrote:

Stefan Urbanek <address@hidden> wrote:

* User/Developer files separation

My suggetsion is to separate gnustep* packages into two: user and
developer. User package will contain libraries, resources, tools and
apps. Developer packages will contain header files and makefiles. Move
Makefiles and Headers into System/Developer directory.


What we need are binary distributions containing * Frameworks (divided into base, AppKit, GSWeb, DB) * User Apps
* Developer Tools

In my opinion, GNUstep is already somewhat like that. If you ignore the semantic debate about where things go, and what they're named, you end up with this. GNUstep *itself* could be considered the "Frameworks" or "Development" package. ProjectCenter and Gorm, as much as they may be a part of the "GNUstep Project", I don't consider them a part of "GNUstep". They would be the "Developer Tools" package. And, just to use more quotation marks, GNUMail.app is a part of the "GNUstep Project", but fits into the "User Apps" category.

So, that format seems to exist already, but is covered over by a blanket term of "The GNUstep Project".

(NOTE: Yes, I love parenthetical comment and using "quotation" marks... sorry about that. ;))


Tim Harrison

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]