On Thursday, December 11, 2014, Graeme Geldenhuys < [email protected]> wrote:
> Maybe I'm not understanding Juha, but I think this is rubbish. It's not > that black and white. LCL contains a lot of components not compatible or > not existing in the VCL. > > But I also understand that they don't want every single component > included in the LCL, because it means they will probably end up having > to support it. Hence they created the Lazarus-CCR project on SourceForge. > True, LCL must have other useful components, too. I am not really against adding this particular component if it proves to be different enough compared to existing comps. Somebody else must decide that. Still, I have understood LCL should be kept small rather than bloated. It is not meant to cover every possible use case. It is ok to use components from elsewhere. Suggesting CCR is seen as a punishment. Why? It was made for such components. It supports maintenance of those components well. The author gets commit access and there is a CCR section in bug tracker. Currently most CCR components are poorly maintained but it is the fault of the fleeing authors, not CCR itself. Michael Fuchs, can you promise to maintain your component, where ever it is placed? Regards Juha
-- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
