On 19.10.2009, at 15:20, Dejan Lekic wrote: > I just wanted to clarify one thing - if you take a closer look, FLTK 2 > project is "all-in-one" as well. Bill started making a compatibility > layer > with FLTK 1, and IMHO that is the way to do it. > > Pardon me, but I do not see the point of reinventing the wheel and > making > yet another "all-in-one" branch. > > Do not get me wrong, I do not want to start yet another flame war > here, it > is just my point of view. I appreciate very much what Matt does, but I > fear it will be just yet another huge branch in history of FLTK... :(
Hi Dejan, yes, FLTK2 has a compatibility layer, however it seems to be incomplete (correct me if I am wrong). But the main reason for using the FLTK1 core was to avoid the instabilities of the FLTK2 core. Is this the right way? Will this create yet another dead branch? I don't know, but I wanted to give it at least a try. So far, I'd say it is feasible. I can't answer the other questions. Matthias _______________________________________________ fltk-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
