discuss-gnustep
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re[2]: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality co


From: Manuel Guesdon
Subject: Re[2]: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control)
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 00:26:09 +0200 (CEST)

On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:31:23 +0200 Helge Hess <address@hidden> wrote:
 >| > I do not agree because you will not find many Mac OS X apps which only 
 >| > rely on Cocoa and this GNUstep cannot be used for porting. I am 
 >| > thinking of CoreFoundation, Carbon, Quicktime, WebCore, the security 
 >| > stuff, Apple Scripts and so on... Besides why would anyone be 
 >| > interested in a GS port if there is no real environment to run GS 
 >| > apps?
 >| 
 >| I absolutely agree. GNUstep might be good for *Linux* (or BSD or 
 >| whatever free system) developers who sooner or later intend to port to 
 >| MacOSX, but not for the reverse.

I don't agree :-)
Personally, I don't care about MacOSX but I like xStep API. When I've heard 
about NeXT 
something like 10 years ago, I've found this was very superior to windows 
development APIs. 
Now, after having used Borland, MFC, php, and lots of thing, I really 
appreciate 
GNUstep and *nix . I don't have interest in Mac OS X or windows _today_. May be 
tomorrow 
or the day after tomorrow...


 >| >> Yes, I see the intention of a NeXTstep remake. I would love that. The 
 >| >> moment GS will have a decent ProjectBuilder (including Editor, 
 >| >> Class-Browser and GDB integration) I will leave MOSX. For me then 
 >| >> just EOModeler and WebObjectsBuilder would be missing.
 >| 
 >| Notably NeXTstep never had such a great ProjectBuilder, Class-Browser, 
 >| etc. It was always pretty much bare bones. PBX is a bit better but 
 >| still not comparable to "real" IDEs like Eclipse or (duck) 
 >| VisualStudio.

Yes, Visual Studio is really a great tool (may be the only good thing from 
microsoft :-)
I've used PB on windows and Mac OS X but I really prefer xemacs and xterm..



 >| Well ... whether Windows is important basically comes down to what the 
 >| "GS project" is. Philip sees GS as EOF+WO and in this case I fully 
 >| agree, Windows is absolutely crucial. All successful Web development 
 >| environment run and need to run on Windows, this is true for PHP, Zope, 
 >| MySQL, J2EE, etc.

Well, I thing about projects for which I'd be interested in having GNustep 
running on Unix 
_and_ Windows.
But It's not a need for everyone. If you have to deploy on unix and you can 
develop on unix, 
there's no need for windows port.

Now, we have a solid base library,.... 
Next, some people need/want/like desktop stuff, some others web stuff, windows 
porting...

I think people working on GNUstep have very different interests. I can't tell 
one is better than the 
other and I think the whole project progress. 

Different people, different projects, different needs, interests and 
priorities...

BTW, I'd really like to know why people here are interested and (may be) work 
on GNUstep. May be 
it could help to understand each others :-)


Manuel






reply via email to

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