Re: Some random thoughs and questions on the future of GNUstep

[Nicola Pero]

>> There would still be maintenance, I'm afraid. Just like there is
>> maintenance with gcc that has to be done. Maybe we could get some nice
>> features with less effort but there'd still need to be maintenance.
>
> Yes, but less maintenance. GNUstep Make doesn't just build application and
> framework bundles but also normal libraries and such.

Yes, but building a library is trivial compared to building a framework. :-)

Most of the "maintenance" is really needed because of the need to support
GNUstep-specific
directory layouts, library combos, frameworks, various types of bundles
and plists, etc. ;-)

A good example of an open task that took a long time to implement (because
of lack
of manpower) is the framework support for Windows.  Unfortunately, using
CMake or
something else wouldn't have made this easier, because someone still has
to implement
framework support for Windows; those packages don't have it.  So instead
of doing it
in gnustep-make, you do it in CMake. ;-)

I suggest that to reduce maintenance, we reduce the amount of 'very
custom' things that
we support, and try to converge into a more 'standard' setup. ;-)

Thanks