[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integ

From: Helge Hess
Subject: Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 12:54:37 +0100


Manuel, I'm sorry to see that you have no intentions to do work on a solution.

The way you are discussing a cooperation suggestion is really unacceptable and I'm not going to follow you on that anymore. I think most GNUstep people know me well enough to ackknowledge my past contributions whether you personally consider them major or not. The company I work for has released a huge number of *free software*, LGPL frameworks last year. So they are ready to use by GNU projects.

So, all the other GSWHackers, I would like to see whether we could work together on a single project instead of doing things twice. Of course this doesn't have to be a hard move from gnustep-web to SOPE, eg we could start out to port some applications to work with both application servers (shouldn't be difficult if gnustep-web is really WO like) and then do some better evaluation whats SOPE gives or not.

On 02.03.2004, at 10:40, Manuel Guesdon wrote:
| > I think Dave have similar exemple.
| Dave?
David Wetzel

Yes, I know Dave personally ;-)

The question went to Dave to see what kind of applications he runs (I know he does some webmail application). Dave, what is your opinion on that? I know that you also invested quite some work into gnustep-web and it would be pretty nice to see how hard it is to get some of your applications running. Maybe you are joining Wocoa again in June? Would be a good place to see what fits.

| In short: the goal of your project isn't WebObjects compatibility, it
| is some other goals you have (but didn't line out).
Please. I've wrote a lot of things in it I don't use, just to improve compatibility but yes, I didn't write a raw HTML parser
because I was preferring using existing parser.

Yes, I understand this. The result is: incompatibility with WebObjects templates, including WebObjects Builder. Which is a pretty basic compatibility demand.

SOPE offers that.

| > So, after reading last posts, I'd like to be sure about the direction | > of projects. If the goal is only to give more mainteners to OOg/Skyrix
| > projects, I don't agree.
| You make it sound like a one way direction, as if gnustep-web
| participants can't gain anything from SOPE.
At least one other person understanted your message like me. I've never said gnustep-web people have nothing to gain, I just say that IMHO, direction and goals are/was not clear.

Well, to the other guys: Over all the ranting we did not discuss any directions nor concrete goals at all! I would like to discuss how a cooperation between SOPE and GSWHackers might look like. This is a work of cooperation, not too easy to find out, but will provide value to everyone in the long run.

The primary goal is pretty clear and well stated before: streamline resources on a single application server instead of doing two. Don't do things twice.

I'm not the only one to use gsweb and I just say that people who
have developped applications based on gsweb probably don't want to see it just
like you won't just drop NGObjWeb from OOg to replace it by a something
else just next week.

a) No one was suggesting to drop gsweb from one second to the other nor
was anyone suggesting an API change. So obviously all the applications written by gstep-web users must run first and obviously this shouldn't
   be too hard.
b) There is no point to drop NGObjWeb from OGo immediately, but of course
   (after all thats the whole idea!), OGo would use a new, merged one in
   the long run (just like we intend to use gstep-base in the long run!)

So, to bring actual cooperation forward ;-):

  Call for applications!
  Who are you?

Where do we find GNUstepWeb applications? We would do the first step and see what we can do for gnustep-web compatibility based on actual porting and what of gnustep-web is required to be added to SOPE due to missing functionality.

Manuels application (eCommStep) seems to be proprietary software not available in sourcecode form. The same seems to be true for TCWebMail (but I guess I can work with David directly on that).

And: who are you? So far I know that Manuel, David and Mirko seem to be working on gnustep-web. I guess there are more than just three users?

best regards,

reply via email to

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