[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnumed-devel] the (wxwidgets) 2.6 issue

From: Sebastian Hilbert
Subject: Re: [Gnumed-devel] the (wxwidgets) 2.6 issue
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 15:56:06 +0200
User-agent: KMail/1.8.1

On Thursday 23 June 2005 06:01, J Busser wrote:
> I am wanting a better understanding of options, and timing, to get
> past this impasse.
> What are the considerations?
> Is it a problem that the people who have done most of the client
> coding don't have enough time to update the existing code to be
> 2.6-centric?
> Or is it bigger, a problem that 2.6 (also) brings with it enough
> changes that the people who have done the coding to date lack the
> time to get comfortable / adept at 2.6?
> The reason that I am wondering is because if it is a matter of
> someone doing the "slogging" to bring the existing code up to date, I
> could be interested to chip in financially and participate in the
> effort to find someone to do it, provided the size of the job would
> not deplete what I need to conserve for that anticoagulation clinic
> project.
> However if a one-time infusion of "extra" help would have limited
> value (e.g. because those coding to date don't yet feel adept at 2.6)
> that would make a one-time approach a lot less effective.
> Would it be useful to try to find / obtain such help or support
> anyone to take the time to do it? Is there any sense of how much code
> (I assume it is only the client code) that would need to be updated
> i.e. how big a job (# of days or hours) it would be?
> Thoughts --- illumination & any dispelling of naivety, as the case
> may apply --- appreciated.
Hi all,

I can only shed light on my position but so be it. Let me zoom out a little 
and look at the big picture. There are developers and there are users. Let's 
look at the developers first. Some of them like Karsten rarely ever change 
their running systems. That means they work with what they have on there 
system. In Karsten's case it is wx2.4. I my case it is 2.5.3. Not because I 
particularly like 2.5.3 but because it ships with SUSE 9.3. SUSE 9.3 is a 
fairly recent distribution. Until recently I worked with SUSE 9.2 which ships 
with wx2.4. And that is exactly the point. We use what ships with our 

Now let's take a look at the userbase. There are two types of users. First one 
doesn't know a thing about linux and will try up to date distros. I am not 
aware of a single distribution that ships with wx2.6. So what will they get ? 
wx2.4 or 2.5 (almost 2.6). Now that sucks. The other user type has more or 
less GNU/Linux knowledge. Those users could potentially install/compile any 
wx version we see fit. But most likely they will not.

From a technical standpoint wx 2.6 and 2.4 differ. There is a detailed guide 
to the changes somewhere on the net. Converting code from 2.4 to 2.6 is not 
too much work but 2.6 is not completely backwards compatible. 

So what do I /Karsten do about this right now ? Well if I see things that can 
be changed for 2.5/2.6 that still run on 2.4 we will change it immediately. 
And so can anyone else !!! 

There is no easy way right now. You cannot and should not request developers 
to invest time to install wx2.6 on their boxes. This is disrespectful. But 
fear no more. Sooner or later most distros will ship wx 2.6 . Until then we 
have to live with what we have. Unless some steps up and follows my following 

wxpython support multiversion install. 
create multiversion rpms/debs/foo package format for : SUSE 9.3 (my system) 
SUSE 9.2 (some older system I use) Various other distros like FC. Sarge 
(Karsten's system)

All those packages must be built against clean distro packages. They must 
replace the versions that ship with various distros. BTW you can be a hero by 
doing that since many other projects face the same problem right now. 

IMHO save your funds for your project. Require exactly one version of wx and 
ship this to your clients /customers. 
Sebastian Hilbert 
Leipzig / Germany
[]  -> PGP welcome, HTML ->/dev/null
ICQ: 86 07 67 86   -> No files, no URL's
VoIP: callto://address@hidden
My OS: Suse Linux. Geek by Nature, Linux by Choice

reply via email to

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