Hi Nicolas, Le 21 juil. 08 à 21:49, Nicolas Roard a écrit :
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 7:18 PM, David Chisnall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> On 21 Jul 2008, at 16:15, Nicolas Roard wrote: >>>>>> For Camaelon, does Nicolas have an opinion? >>> >>> What exactly is not stable ?.. (not saying there's nothing to >>> improve, >>> just asking if there are stability issues right now?) >> >> I think there is an issue with Camaelon + GORM (I remember having to >> turn of Camaelon for GORM, not sure if this is fixed). There are > > Really? Thas sounds suspiciously like a problem with the poseAs for > the icons -- but then it's really weird as it's a bug that was fixed > a long > time ago. Maybe something changed ... Yes. I recently stumbled on the following one which I initially wrongly submitted as a Gorm bug: https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?23651 https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?23654 <-- this one is probably a Camaelon bug too, it has vanished since I recreated the gorm file with Camaelon turned off >> also a few controls which are incorrectly drawn. > > Do we have a list ? Popup button, may be table headers. That's all I remember right now. In my previous mail in this thead, I also mention other issues. >>>>>> What other thing should be in >>>>>> this release? User applications are less of a priority - we have >>>>>> until 0.5 to get them really polished - but it would be nice to >>>>>> have a >>>>>> few working, at least as examples. >>> >>> Well, there's the documentation stuff that I need to submit asap, >>> and we should have after that an ok documentation process that we >>> can >>> use. As a dev/framework release, documentation should be one of our >>> main focus. Actually, shouldn't we try to write tutorials (even >>> short) ? >>> This might be worth delaying the release by a month, in fact. >> >> Documentation for frameworks is important, as are examples. > > Right. There's three steps imho: > 1/- basic documentation of the frameworks, gsdoc-style > 2/- added documentation more about the how / broad view, still > focused on > frameworks (and bits of "how to do this step..." / cookbook) > 3/- tutorials > > If we are going to focus on 0.4 being a developer release, I think > we have to > concentrate on the documentation -- else it's just a tech demo. > #1 is already mostly done, and is mostly automatized > #2 and #3 are independant, #2 might be easier to write after having > written some #3 ;-) > > I think that #3 is the most important for a dev release -- we need > very simple, > very short application(s) that we can use as an example of > EtoileUI/Pragmatic Smalltalk/CoreObject, and we need to write small > tutorials > about them. > > Think about it : you are a developer that /might/ be interested by > Etoile, maybe haven't even installed gnustep or etoile. The next step > after looking > at screenshots (...) is to look for a very short tutorial, to see if > it's worth your time. Agreed. #2 will probably very hard to achieve in the current time frame though. Having frameworks almost fully documented at API level + examples is already good. When Apple released the first version of Mac OS X, Cocoa API documentation was almost non-existent and cookbooks/guides only started to appear with 10.2 iirc. >> I was seeing the structured editor as a CodeObject developer example, >> as well as a usable app. I also want to write a simple outliner in >> Smalltalk as a demo. It doesn't have to be feature-complete for 0.4, >> but having it working with some basic functionality would be nice. > > Well, if the Structured Editor was finished we could encapsulate it > in a set of classes that certainly would be neat to use for showing > small > cool apps... but it's not, and frankly considering my very low > thoughput > I don't want to promise anything. ok :) Cheers, Quentin. _______________________________________________ Etoile-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-discuss
