D. Höhn wrote: []
I do not quite understand why. Please do not misunderstand me, I am not completely opposed, I just do not get why. We are good at something, which is packaging Unix based applications. There are enough
This is a false opposition. There are more and more "Unix based applications" (whatever that means on an operating system that is itself based on Unix) that try to use OSX's native graphics and are then in a natural way packed as app bundles. I don't see why qt-x11 should be considered more "Unix based" than qt-mac, for example.
applications out there which have not been packaged yet and we are having trouble already keeping up. I just fear that introducing .app into the whole system complicates matters to the worse.
It would be interesting to have statistics about the main activities of Fink developers these last months. I bet that only a rather small part of their time went into actually packaging new packages. People are not creating Fink packages because "there are so many applications out there", but because they either want some package for their own purposes or because it is fun to spend time with a particular piece of software. In both categories there will be more and more app bundles.
There is a saying in german "Schuster bleib bei deinen Leisten" which means as much as "Stick to what you are good at". I would suggest, that we leave the .app handling to others and concentrate on improving fink
To "others" like Ben Reed or what? Nobody is forced to make app bundles out of their fink packages. But there are app bundles that would greatly enrich fink if they were available as fink packages.
itself as well as its packages. I really do not mind downloading KDE/QTMac from somewhere else. Rather than having calssic KDE/QT plus KDE/QTMac in Fink.
But I do mind. Why should I start reading web pages with long lists of instructions on what to download from where and to install first in /opt and /usr/local and then download something else and start compiling with autoconf and glibtoolize and whatever and then install in /Applications when I could just say "fink install koffice-aqua" and let fink do its magic? Not to mention subsequent "update-all" or "remove" commands that you don't get from somewhere else.
-- Martin
------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
