Re: Should we split the project into two branches?

[Max Chan]

> On Feb 14, 2022, at 3:45 PM, Richard Frith-Macdonald 
> <richard@frithmacdonald.me.uk> wrote:
> 
> If you wanted to say that GNUstep is *extremely* reluctant to break 
> portability of existing code, that would also be fine and true.  it's also a 
> non-issue in practice: who wants to rewrite working code to make it less 
> portable?

If adding major new features requires breaking portability to some less than 
popular platforms, I’d say it is appropriate to temporarily shed those minority 
platforms for now to get the features in, then try to backport.

Here is also a reality check for those minor platforms:
* FreeBSD has a Linux compatibility layer. We can temporarily rely on that 
instead of having to do things natively.
* MIPS architecture is dead with MIPS the company and Loongson, the last 
company actively developing high performance MIPS architecture chips, announced 
their abandonment of the architecture. MIPS company moved on to RISC-V, and 
Loongson moved on to their own ISA (which is apparently similar enough to 
RISC-V they have built a chip that can support both, selectable using a strap 
pin.)
* In some sense, even Windows have gained a Linux compatibility layer in 
Windows Subsystem for Linux.

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP