Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?

[Daniel Santos]

Being gnustep an API and development environment, its foundation is the 
open step specification, and has as an objective to follow the state of 
the Cocoa APIs.

But the openstep spec also specifies a set of applications and user 
interface guidelines that make NextStep and consequently GNUStep look 
and feel the way it does. It is radically different than any other 
desktop environment that I know. The application is the menu, that 
manages a set of documents. Most applications are multi-document windows 
with a menu bar. The integration of these into gnustep is an illusion.

Besides, the framework has a powerful design philosophy. Applications 
have a way to provide services to users and to applications, which makes 
them more powerful and resembles the unix style of shell programming. 
Not to mention that is supports transparent object oriented remote 
method invocations.

One other point that is of great value is that its all written in 
objective C, a truly object oriented language (this is a selling point).

You can change the way it looks, but if you change the way it works, 
seems to me that the value is lost, and it turns into yet another 
desktop environment. This difference may be a barrier to new users. For 
example the menu and a window for each document clutters the screen. You 
can solve this with virtual desktops (windows has some free ones). But 
this is practical for lengthy tasks.

About the fact that you may be keeping a fossil alive, this is a 
misconception. In what way are current desktops evolved from their 
earlier versions ? Perhaps they look nicer. But it is still all about 
windows, menus, icons, etc.

Next at the time, was sold as a machine, with an operating system and a 
basic set of applications. It was a common-denominator all-in-one, ideal 
for those who didn't know how to buy computer systems, and needed 
usability and power. To the user, GNUStep can only be as good as that. 
Applications that integrate well in the framework, and that span the 
most common daily tasks. Linux users are mostly developers or at least 
computer literate. The killer apps they need are already there. 
Development environments, compilers, text processors, etc.

My point is, that if its good, why does it need to keep up with others, 
if its reason to exist is to be better that them. The fact is that or it 
isn't known, or that most people simply don't want it. Those that do, 
use it.

Daniel Santos


Gregory John Casamento wrote:
> Mark,
>
>
>   
> > Hi All... I don't mean to come on and be a flame thrower my first
> > post. Believe me, I am hoping to be convinced that GNUStep is a great
> > choice... but my three weeks of poking and playing makes me wonder...
> >     
>
> I'm not going to try to win you over, only give you the facts about where we 
> are and what our intentions are.
>
>   
> > Here's the thing: I am getting ready to start a pretty big project in
> > Linux and I am trying to decide what to use as a GUI/Framework. I did
> > a lot of research and came across the GNUStep project and thought:
> > Aha! This sounds great! Just what I was looking for!
> >     
>
> :)
>
>   
> > I downloaded it and ran through the couple of (old) tutorials I could
> > find. It's enough to get a SENSE of what is possible... but not enough
> > to persuade me to commit my future to it. And the look and feel of it
> > is -- I'm sorry -- very tired and worn.  I know from reading the
> > archives that apparently a lot of the GNUSTEPPERS  look longingly at
> > the bland square icons and widgets of GNUStep getting nostalgic warm
> > fuzzies (the way my father does when he looks at a '54 Buick)-- but
> > trust me no user I'm building an app for will have the same reaction.
> >     
>
> While it's true that some people like the older look, there is a consensus that 
> it really needs to be changed.  The theme-engine available in the Etoile 
> project (a desktop project based on GNUstep) currently allows great flexibility 
> in GNUstep's look.   Please see previous posts on this mailing list regarding 
> the themes available for it.
>
>   
> > "1) Adopt a more modern look. "
> >
> > Umm... no... it still looks like it did in 1999. 
> >     
> There is a branch which contains theme related changes and the beginnings of 
> integration of Camaelon (Etoile's theme engine) into GNUstep directly.
>
>   
> > "2) Make regular releases. Start courting different distributions to
> > include GNUstep in their package set."
> > Can' comment on this... I don't know how frequently the releases were
> > before, but it appears that UBUNTU releases new versions of their
> > whole distro more frequently than GNUSTEP releases updates.
> >     
>
>
> We currently have two live CDs and GNUstep is available on Debian, Ubuntu and, soon, Redhat.   
>
> As for release frequency, I believe we release more frequently than Ubuntu releases their entire distro. 
>
> .... skipped reply to 3, since it didn't seem terribly relevant ....
>
>   
> > "4) Start appealing more to the Mac OS X/Cocoa crowd."
> >
> > I honestly don't know how important that is, or what is meant by it...
> > but appealing to the Mac OS Users by updating the look and feel would
> > be a wonderful place to start.
> >     
>
> Indeed... as stated before... there is a theme engine available the the default 
> look is set to change.
>
>   
> > "5) Focus and concentrate on one and only one set of display
> > technologies per platform."
> >
> > Not sure where this is... but it seems reasonable. Having a way of
> > using the native look and feel would also be a huge plus for those of
> > us who don't WANT to look different than every other app on a
> > Distro...
> >     
>
> Your assumption is incorrect.  It has nothing to do with the look, but how the 
> graphics are rendered.  GNUstep's look is consistent across all platforms 
> today.  This goal discusses moving away from older technologies such as Xlib 
> and art onto the Cairo graphics library.   This refers, in case you're unaware, 
> to the back-end library of GNUstep which handles basic drawing and events.   We 
> have a version of this backend that is currently in beta.
>
> Using "native widgets" is a different issue altogether and has been discussed 
> before.
>
>   
> > "6) Decide what we are. Yes, that's right. Some people view GNUstep as
> > a desktop, others view GNUstep as a development environment."
> >
> > I see this still being debated today... Someone in charge needs to
> > stick a stake in the ground and move on already...
> >     
>
> I have said many times on this list in the past year: GNUstep is an API and development environment.  Period.  Desktops such as Etoile are built on top of it.  
>
>   
> > "7) Make GNUstep friendly with other environments like GNOME, KDE,
> > Windows and etc. Make sure that GNUstep functions sanely in these
> > environments."
> >
> > Oh yeah, you betcha. This is a biggie. And not done. I can run a
> > GNUStep app in Gnome, but if I hit the wrong key,  suddenly find
> > myself in a non-responsive wmaker session! Yikes!
> >
> > (further, untrue, rants regarding the mistaken assumption that GNUstep is tied 
> > to wmaker or somehow dependent deleted)
> >     
>
> GNUstep is not tied to WindowMaker.  This is an extremely common misconception. 
>  What this point refers to is interoperability with freedesktop and, themes.   
> Many changes have been made in the backend to make GNUstep play better with 
> freedesktop based window managers.  Also, I'd be interested in what wrong key 
> you're hitting in GNOME that lands you in a wmaker session.   That certainly is 
> a bug if it's severe enough to cause you to quit one Window Manager and land 
> you squarely in antoher. ;)   If it is happening, I invite you to, please, 
> submit a bug on savannah to help us squash it as soon as possible.
>
>   
> > I guess what I'm asking is this: Is GNUStep a living, breathing
> > project that wants to be useful in 2007 and beyond, or are you guys
> > the Computer version of the SCA (Society of Creative Anachronism) --
> > happy to be the caretakers of a historical moment in time, extolling
> > the virtues of a system that has lost its effectiveness, but was
> > really cool way back when?
> >     
>
> No, we're not the computer version of the SCA.  We're moving forward.  We're 
> trying to modernize the GUI and getting things in shape for the future.  The 
> problem with GNUstep, historically, has been that there are far too many people 
> willing to sit on the sidelines and criticize than there are people willing to 
> help us and take part.  :)
>
>   
> > I apologize for the language here. I know many will be greatly
> > insulted, and I don't mean it that way. I just want to know where
> > GNUStep is headed before I commit time to learn it, and resources to
> > develop in it...
> >     
>
> Asking sincere questions is one thing.   Casting about preconceptions based on 
> a cursory examination of the facts is quite another.
>
>   
> > Anyone?
> >     
>
> I hope my comments help.  
>
> The GNUstep community would welcome you with open arms if you're willing to 
> help us make GNUstep better.  Dare to be different, or be content to just be.
>
> Sincerely,
> --
> Gregory Casamento -- OLC, Inc 
> # GNUstep Chief Maintainer
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Mark Grice <markjoel60@gmail.com>
> To: discuss-gnustep@gnu.org
> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 11:54:03 PM
> Subject: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?
>
>
> Hi All... I don't mean to come on and be a flame thrower my first
> post. Believe me, I am hoping to be convinced that GNUStep is a great
> choice... but my three weeks of poking and playing makes me wonder...
>
> Here's the thing: I am getting ready to start a pretty big project in
> Linux and I am trying to decide what to use as a GUI/Framework. I did
> a lot of research and came across the GNUStep project and thought:
> Aha! This sounds great! Just what I was looking for!
>
> I downloaded it and ran through the couple of (old) tutorials I could
> find. It's enough to get a SENSE of what is possible... but not enough
> to persuade me to commit my future to it. And the look and feel of it
> is -- I'm sorry -- very tired and worn.  I know from reading the
> archives that apparently a lot of the GNUSTEPPERS  look longingly at
> the bland square icons and widgets of GNUStep getting nostalgic warm
> fuzzies (the way my father does when he looks at a '54 Buick)-- but
> trust me no user I'm building an app for will have the same reaction.
>
> So... I did some more reading... and I come across this great blog
>  post:
>
> http://heronsperch.blogspot.com/2006/12/plans-for-change.html
>
> And I think: YES! Great! the guys in charge get it... this is exactly
> what I am hoping for... then I see the date: 2006??? Oh oh. That was a
> YEAR ago this was discussed... What has a year wrought?
>
> "1) Adopt a more modern look. "
>
> Umm... no... it still looks like it did in 1999.
>
> "2) Make regular releases. Start courting different distributions to
> include GNUstep in their package set."
>
> Can' comment on this... I don't know how frequently the releases were
> before, but it appears that UBUNTU releases new versions of their
> whole distro more frequently than GNUSTEP releases updates.
>
> "3) Eliminate the need for GNUstep.sh..."
>
> Well, this one wasn't a biggie for me... but I still had to run the
> GNUStep.sh to get things to compile.
>
> "4) Start appealing more to the Mac OS X/Cocoa crowd."
>
> I honestly don't know how important that is, or what is meant by it...
> but appealing to the Mac OS Users by updating the look and feel would
> be a wonderful place to start.
>
> "5) Focus and concentrate on one and only one set of display
> technologies per platform."
>
> Not sure where this is... but it seems reasonable. Having a way of
> using the native look and feel would also be a huge plus for those of
> us who don't WANT to look different than every other app on a
> Distro...
>
> "6) Decide what we are. Yes, that's right. Some people view GNUstep as
> a desktop, others view GNUstep as a development environment."
>
> I see this still being debated today... Someone in charge needs to
> stick a stake in the ground and move on already...
>
> "7) Make GNUstep friendly with other environments like GNOME, KDE,
> Windows and etc. Make sure that GNUstep functions sanely in these
> environments."
>
> Oh yeah, you betcha. This is a biggie. And not done. I can run a
> GNUStep app in Gnome, but if I hit the wrong key,  suddenly find
> myself in a non-responsive wmaker session! Yikes!
>
> Selling GNUStep is hard enough... having to sell Window Maker on top
> of it is a real stretch...
>
> I guess what I'm asking is this: Is GNUStep a living, breathing
> project that wants to be useful in 2007 and beyond, or are you guys
> the Computer version of the SCA (Society of Creative Anachronism) --
> happy to be the caretakers of a historical moment in time, extolling
> the virtues of a system that has lost its effectiveness, but was
> really cool way back when?
>
> I apologize for the language here. I know many will be greatly
> insulted, and I don't mean it that way. I just want to know where
> GNUStep is headed before I commit time to learn it, and resources to
> develop in it...
>
> Anyone?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-gnustep mailing list
> Discuss-gnustep@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-gnustep mailing list
> Discuss-gnustep@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
>
>