On 2010-09-24 18:17:27 +0200, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: > On 24 September 2010 00:41, waldo kitty <[email protected]> wrote: > > one must also remember and take into account that delphi compatibility is a > > goal... that FPC and Laz have the option and ability to move further than > > delphi is a plus but delphi compatibility is still a requirement... > > And the downfall of Lazarus LCL. > > > > and what happens when delphi does add such capability? will your > > fix/enhancement be "updated" to match delphi? > > And this is where the "being delphi compatible" pipe dream falls flat > on it's face! First we get bitched at for not contributing, then we > do, then delphi implements it in a totally different way (sometimes > years down the line - and sometimes I think on purpose in a different > way), then it is expected from us to break backward compatibility with > FPC itself, and rewrite features to be yet again delphi compatible. No > innovation - simply follow Delphi like lambs to the slaughterhouse. > That is NO WAY to run a FOSS project. > > > -- > Regards, > - Graeme -
I agree 100% with Graeme. FPC and Lazarus should follow its own path. -- Leonardo M. Ramé Medical IT - Griensu S.A. Av. Colón 636 - Piso 8 Of. A X5000EPT -- Córdoba Tel.: +54(351)4246924 +54(351)4247788 +54(351)4247979 Cel.: +54(351)5394365 -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
