On 29 Oct 2008, at 09:01, Fred Kiefer wrote:
I think this is not completely true. At least I think that
• Added support for displaying truncated strings.
is still on the list of the thinks to do :-)
I don't even know what this is ... so I can't tell whether we have it
or not. However, the other things are clearly features long present in
GNUstep.
But all of this is not the point here. This isn't about my system is
more complete then yours, or is it?
We all know that GNUstep has more features implemented than
Cocotron, it
also is the much older project. What I still find fascinating with
Cocotron is how it appeals to Cocoa developers that don't want to
leave
there original development platform and still deliver applications for
MS Windows. What Cocotron achieved here is unmatched by GNUstep. We
should accept that and try to match this instead of pointing to the
shortcomings Cocotron that has plenty. Why wont somebody sit down and
uses the Cocotron XCode environment to cross compile GNUstep to
Windows?
I don't see any problem in using their development environment
although
it isn't LGPL or GPL. As long as we don't mix the source code we
should
be on the save side. With that done people wanting to port
applications
from Cocoa to Windows have a fair choice. And of course I hope they
choose GNUstep as it is the project I develop for and which license I
prefer.
(For this to happen we will still have to work on our UI appearance.
Even with a better foundation and more features people are first
impressed by the look of an application)
Yes ... well, I'm a long time advocate of theming in GNUstep, but we
need someone to actually work on it :-(
In any case, perhaps you are referring to other appearance glitches
etc, I don't know if GNUstep is any worse or better than Cocotron in
that respect on windows (better when I looked, but that was quite a
while ago).
My feel from reading the blog about this port is, that the issue of
completeness is unimportant (GNUstep clearly being much more complete,
but a developer only needs the features they want to use, and in a
free software project can add minor missing features) and reliability
is also unimportant (GNUstep being much more reliable, but a developer
only needs bits they want to use to be reliable, and in a free
software project can fix minor bugs). It seems that in these areas
Cocotron is now 'good enough'.
So I agree with your main point ... the only reason I can see for
Cocotron being chosen in this case is that a Mac developer was able to
simply use XCode to port to windows, and the obvious way to add that
capability to GNUstep is to 'steal' that from Cocotron. Presumably we
could take the development environment, hack it a little to support
generic unix as well as windows, and provide a MacOS installer package
to install it on our web site, so that people could build using XCode
for GNUstep on windows and unix-style operating systems.
Is there any Mac based developer out there who'd like to do that?
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnustep mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
