discuss-gnustep
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: What should and should not go in?


From: Gregory John Casamento
Subject: Re: What should and should not go in?
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 08:26:01 -0800 (PST)

--- Richard Frith-Macdonald <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> On 24 Jan 2004, at 05:25, Gregory John Casamento wrote:
> 
> > All,
> >
> > I am wondering where all of the fuss about "this was not in OpenStep 
> > and
> > therefore shouldn't go in" is coming from, as I've been hearing this a 
> > lot
> > lately.
> 
> It's not coming from the GNUstep developers anyway ... I have not 
> noticed
> any GNUstep developer say that all MacOS-X extensions should be kept
> out of GNUstep.  Even Alexanders objections to NSToolBar (which are
> specific to that class) might well be swayed if someone contributed 
> good,
> clean, simple. mantainable code.

I hope so. :)

> >  OpenStep is a standard that was created in 1994, a decade ago, that
> > standard is dated to say the least.  So, why would we want to tie 
> > ourselves to
> > this especially when MOSX represents an extension of it?
> 
> I believe our policy statement has (for a long, long time) said that we 
> are
> (and will remain) OpenStep compatible AND that we track changes in 
> MacOS-X
> to remain compatible with that.   To me, that's pretty clear.
> The website also used to say that where the two are incompatible we will
> find workarounds and superior solutions :-)
> 
> What we need is to clearly define the types of things we 
> should/shouldn't

Agreed.

> > include in GNUstep.  Using the recent NSToolbar spat as an example, I,
> > personally, believe that we should put it in, despite any technical 
> > objections,
> > simply because it's used by a number of applications under MOSX and, 
> > with it's
> > inclusion, we'll attract those who've used it.   Now, I'm not saying 
> > that there
> > are tens of thousands of developers who want to use NSToolbar.  No.  
> > I'm
> > asserting that the more we stray from MOSX, the more we loose potential
> > developers and users.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> Where MacOS-X classes are missing, it's because nobody has contributed
> a good implementation yet, not because there is any hidden policy to 
> keep
> them out.
> 

I know.   I added a list of the unimplemented classes to the tasks list.  My
concern was that I thought I was hearing a sentiment recently which was against
putting anything in that's not in the original spec.

GJC

=====
Gregory John Casamento -- CEO/President Open Logic Corp.
-- bheron on #gnustep, #linuxstep, & #gormtalk ---------------- 
Please sign the petition against software patents at: 
http://www.petitiononline.com/pasp01/petition.html 
-- Maintainer of Gorm (featured in April Linux Journal) -------

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/




reply via email to

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