Re: Proposal question.

[Tim Harrison]

Christian Edward Gruber wrote:

> Hmm.  I agree with the need for GNUstep specific docs, but frankly, this is
> Cocoa... at least in that Cocoa is the heir of OpenStep.  I think that for
> places where GNUstep attempts to keep compatibility, it's quite reasonable
> to say... at least until we have more docs.

In essence, I agree.  However, there are enough syntactic and 
implementation differences with GNUstep that it would be beneficial to 
at least use the Apple documentation as a basis for complete GNUstep 
documentation.  That way, GNUstep becomes a one-stop shop for GNUstep 
development.  One doesn't have to head off to Apple's site, read how 
Cocoa works, then come back to GNUstep and try to figure out the 
differences.  In one way it helps the developer learn both environments. 
 However, having to read one and work out the differences slows down 
adoption of the environment, especially when GNUstep needs people to 
develop for it (not only applications, but to assist in advancing the 
project itself).

> This layout worked well for me on OpenBSD, btw.  I simply used
> /usr/local/GNUstep as $(GNUSTEP_ROOT), and it all worked nicely from there.
> On my own boxes, I will likely use / as the $(GNUSTEP_ROOT), but the above
> worked nicely for a port.  In fact, the existing Makefiles source worked
> into a port with almost no modification (other than the shared-libs stuff
> for OpenBSD)

I've managed to test out a proposal-compliant installation on both 
LinuxSTEP and OpenBSD.  Thus far, it seems wonderful.  I haven't had any 
issues at all.

--

Tim Harrison
tim@linuxstep.org
http://www.linuxstep.org/