On 13.02.2008, at 15:12, Dejan Lekic wrote: > Matthias, I understand what You mean. However i only partially agree > because I think there are other ways to get financial support.
By all means, if anyone knows of bigger sponsors, please help. This was merely an attempt to get a feel if offering cold cash is helpful in the dead end that we are in. FLTK has a huge value to me, but I really want to get to the next step now. Nobody likes fixing bugs vs. adding new features, and I really *really* need a table and a tree view in a nicely integrated way. But if nobody fixes anything anymore, and everybody has their little it- works-for-me fork at home, we will never be taken seriously again. And I really would like to get some users back and new users into FLTK. But without a final FLTK 1 and the forever dangeling FLTK 2, we are probably as attractive as a VW bug without a windshield. If FLTK stops evolving, then maybe it is time to make Fluid write Qt code (the BMW with windshield and even wipers ;-). > It is up to You guys (copyright holders) whether we should have dual > license or not... I am fine with whatever You decide. :) > The truth is - we would really benefit of having (at least one) > full-time developer who exclusively works on FLTK. Sure it would, but who can afford it? And what is their agenda then? Will FLTK become even more of a niche product? Matthias ---- http://robowerk.com/ _______________________________________________ fltk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk
