James Newton wrote:
> If you know of a way to support both OS/X and GNUstep then I will
> help out from my side.
99% of the GNUstep apps run on OS/X and on all platforms that GNUstep
supports (all variants of GNU, *BSD, Windows and proprieatary Unix
variants). So basically porting an application for GNUstep means
porting to OS/X as well. GNUstep is a free implementation of the
OpenStep specification (which now exists as Cocoa). In that sense,
GNUstep is a free Cocoa and more (some may say "less"). Typically,
Cocoa developers' interest in GNUstep is only portability-wise, as
making their programs work for GNUstep is the only way to port them to
Windows (which is, generally, very attractive for them).
> I dont own a machine with GNUstep installed and I probably never
I can say the same thing for OS/X, except by s/probably/definitely/,
at least until it is released as free software.
> Incidentally the GTK+ port uses Quartz and CF.
So there's no way to make it work. Your approach seems to be the
only possibility in that case, I guess.
> I'm not gonna get into pissing contest on the philosophy of free
> software. Beating people with an idea will never make them accept
No surprise. Ethical considerations are off-topic on nearly every
mailing list as they make people uneasy. This mini-discussion is no
> But you have to bridge the gap to get people move from one camp to
My observations are different. By porting powerful free software
(such as Emacs, BASH, grep, sed, GTK+, GIMP, Dia, Gajim, etc.) to say,
Windows, it makes that operating system more compelling. So Windows
users see no reason to migrate to GNU when they have nearly all the
features that those free programs provide. Either way, the popularity
of free software is a shallow goal. It will inevitably happen even
without our help. What's important is the philosophy of the Free
Software Movement, which doesn't propagate to people's minds as easily
as the programs themselves do.
Gajim-devel mailing list