Re: Lowering the barrier (was: Re: build systems)

2007-11-11 Thread Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen
Just a quickie since the kids are screaming :-) : I started a wiki page to collect the status of this discussion: http://live.gnome.org/EasyGnome If I missed anything please comment. Heck please comment anyways. Cheers, Mikkel ___ desktop-devel-list

Re: Lowering the barrier (was: Re: build systems)

2007-11-10 Thread Murray Cumming
On Sat, 2007-11-10 at 00:43 +0100, Matteo Settenvini wrote: [snip] we need some proper documentation explaining how the GNOME stack is built, jhbuild should take care of building. There is a lot of information about how to use jhbuild, including solving specific problems on specific distros.

Re: Lowering the barrier (was: Re: build systems)

2007-11-10 Thread Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen
On 10/11/2007, Matteo Settenvini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Il giorno ven, 09/11/2007 alle 16.58 -0600, Jonathon Jongsma ha scritto: On 11/9/07, Lucas Rocha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Are the current drawbacks of using autotools in GNOME so so so annoying that it would be really worth the

Re: Lowering the barrier (was: Re: build systems)

2007-11-10 Thread Emmanuele Bassi
On Sat, 2007-11-10 at 15:06 +0100, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote: * GObjects are conceptually difficult when you have standard knowledge of C# or Java you know you don't have to use GObjects with C, right? you can write native C# and Java applications. * Autotools are exceptionally hard

Re: Lowering the barrier (was: Re: build systems)

2007-11-10 Thread Elijah Newren
On Nov 10, 2007 7:41 AM, Emmanuele Bassi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 2007-11-10 at 15:06 +0100, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote: * GObjects are conceptually difficult when you have standard knowledge of C# or Java you know you don't have to use GObjects with C, right? you can write

Re: Lowering the barrier (was: Re: build systems)

2007-11-10 Thread Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen
On 10/11/2007, Emmanuele Bassi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 2007-11-10 at 15:06 +0100, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote: * GObjects are conceptually difficult when you have standard knowledge of C# or Java you know you don't have to use GObjects with C, right? you can write native C#

Re: Lowering the barrier (was: Re: build systems)

2007-11-10 Thread James Doc Livingston
On Sat, 2007-11-10 at 14:41 +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: On Sat, 2007-11-10 at 15:06 +0100, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote: * GObjects are conceptually difficult when you have standard knowledge of C# or Java you know you don't have to use GObjects with C, right? you can write

Re: Lowering the barrier (was: Re: build systems)

2007-11-10 Thread Who
On Nov 9, 2007 11:43 PM, Matteo Settenvini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to discuss with you where we could act seriously in this direction. I've got some comments to make: It sounds like at this stage some input from people who have found the learning curve prohibitive might be

Re: Lowering the barrier (was: Re: build systems)

2007-11-10 Thread Emmanuele Bassi
hi; On Sat, 2007-11-10 at 23:33 +0100, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote: On 10/11/2007, Emmanuele Bassi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 2007-11-10 at 15:06 +0100, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote: * GObjects are conceptually difficult when you have

Re: Lowering the barrier (was: Re: build systems)

2007-11-10 Thread Braden McDaniel
On Sun, 2007-11-11 at 00:37 +, Who wrote: [snip] Here are my thoughts: 1. What do you use to code!? What do I need on my system to do this?-- Coding on Windows makes you soft, especially if you used something like Visual Studio. There will be a huge number of

Lowering the barrier (was: Re: build systems)

2007-11-09 Thread Matteo Settenvini
Il giorno ven, 09/11/2007 alle 16.58 -0600, Jonathon Jongsma ha scritto: On 11/9/07, Lucas Rocha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Are the current drawbacks of using autotools in GNOME so so so annoying that it would be really worth the effort of migrating to something else? The only reason I