Just to reply to myself, the MacOSX port would also be nice for 2.0. I have a few dialogs drawn up using InterfaceBuilder but no C++/ObjC code backing them, so they're just dummy windows for now. I can commit them if people would like. IMO, we'd probably get a few hundred thousand OSX users downloading and trying out Abi, if not a million or more.
Dom On Saturday, July 27, 2002, at 06:47 PM, Dom Lachowicz wrote: > Hi folks, > > I think that October 1st is extremely ambitious (read stupid) for a *stable* release >date. Things we need to get together (just from our current codebase): > > A. > 1) Endnotes don't work properly > 2) Footnotes don't work at all > 3) Tables have many bugs and RFEs, not the least of which are: > 3.a) Import/Export RTF > 3.b) Import MSWord > 3.c) Import/Export XHTML > 3.d) Nested tables > 3.e) Lots of unimplemented menu commands > 3.f) Needs lots of UI polish > 4) GTK2 branch will have just been merged. It still needs *massive* amounts of work, >but nothing insurmountable. Most importantly, needs massive amounts of regression >testing. > 5) Revisions and hidden text don't work entirely properly. I'll file bugs on this as >needed. > 6) Windows printing bug > > B. > Possibly planned things (in my order of importance): > 1) XHTML clipboard support > 2) Use libgsf for all input/output filters > 3) use gnome-print for *all* of our printing needs. Chema is almost (99%) finished >removing any gnome dependencies from it and he is making it use FontConfig as its >backend. We'll get superb printing support to PS, PrintPreview, faxes, emails, >printers. I plan on coding SVG and Pixbuf backends for this too. > 4) Use libegg for GTK+ menus > 5) Bonobo > 6) SVG support, ideally XP but platform-specific plugins also possible > > C. > 1) Many/Most of the 820 or so bugs lying around in bugzilla (some of which cover "A" >and "B" items, but many of which don't) > > IMO, my action items 1-4 are of paramount importance, and #5 should work at least as >well as it did in 1.0.2 > > Remember that the primary reason that 1.0.[12] were such successes was that we had >the benefit of several long pre releases (0.7, 0.9). During this time, lots of people >downloaded Abi and banged on it, filed lots of bugreports, wishlist items, ... We'd >be *insanely stupid* not to go through a similar series or two of unstable, >unsupported releases this time around. I'm not saying that we should wait 2 years to >release. I'm very much in favor of a 1.1.1 build released around October with >hopefully all of my "A" action items followed by several more 1.1.x releases. We'd >follow that up with a short 1.3 series which handled most of my "B" items, and then >get to 2.0. "C" items should be integrated all of the time. Note that my "A," "B," >and "C" items don't have to get implemented on necessarily this strict a timetable or >in this order. There is room for mingling and shuffling. I'd realistically hope for a >2.0 no earlier than February 1 and no later than April 15, and it would be unlikely >that even this release would cover 100% of my above listed items. > > FWIW, the next release should be called 2.0. Also, FWIW, I've spent a good part of >my last week working on libgsf, librsvg, and I'm about to start working on >gnome-print, in case you've been wondering what I've been up to. My personal plans >are to target the "B" set inside of AbiWord in a few weeks after the necessary >amounts of work are completed in the parent libraries and restart my work on Abi's >GTK2 port. > > Dom >
