[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: XML idea

From: Kazunobu Kuriyama
Subject: Re: XML idea
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 10:06:16 +0900
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; ja-JP; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1

Alex Perez wrote:

Putting the source code in a subdirectory, and extending the
automatically generated documentation to mark such stuff as
MacOS-X compatibility code would be quite enough to make
me very happy,

I like that idea as well.

However, this does not address the issue of what to do with crap classes which were poorly designed on Apple's part...Would those be included? excluded? See the problem? This doesnt fix the problem. It makes it more complicated.

I think making a subdirectory for that purpose rather helps PortabilityKit
project.  If such a directory exists, we could untar ProtablitiKit.tar.gz
in the source of -base/-gui in such a way that a directory which is a sibling
of the subdirectory is created there. And if the configure script detects the existence of PortablitityKit, the build process could be configured so that the implementation given in the kit is used. (This may remind you of old libstdc++'s.)

Personally, I would have to absolutely vote against this idea since I believe it's FAR too complicated and confusing, and I also feel that a line should be drawn in the sand between PortabilityKit and GNUstep. They're separate projects for a reason. What I see as a possibility is, if someone downloads the entirety of -core and then runs ./configure --with-PortabilityKit, what would happen automagically is the following:

1. (OPTIONAL/NOT NECESSARY) A disclaimer/warning is displayed which states that PortabilityKit is not part of the GNUstep project. 2. PortabilityKit is CVS-fetched from its savannah page into a PortabilityKit directory in the root of -core. 3. PortabilityKit is built (as a framework, optimally) along with the rest of core. 4. PortabilityKit is installed as a framework in $GNUSTEP_SYSTEM_ROOT/Frameworks or wherever is best suitable.

Some people prefer the above; the other not.   I'm not sure.

Also, it is expected to make the maintaince of the both projects easier.

I completely disagree.

I can't understand this point.  Because you want to make the two project
distinguishable, your project should not depend on GNUstep's direcory
hierarchy; GNUstep can go its own way.  Could you explain more why GNUstep
shouldn't take such a hierarchy?  The subdirectory seems to help you
purge what you call craps.

- Kauznobu Kuriyama

reply via email to

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