I'll add that I didn't mention reliability and that I completely agree -
I've never had a crash with Denis' Xournal, it's extremely stable. The
current state of Xournalpp is that crashes are less and less common but
still occur. When I started looking at the code, there were a few bugs in
copy/paste and undo that caused frequent crashing, but that has since been
fixed. I still get crashes from time to time, which I've noted in the
Issues section on the Github page. So, I second the statement about xournal
having a warranty of reliability.
I also think Shuhao makes a good point about user confusion. Certainly when
I selected a project to use and to work on, I had a tough time seeing the
best path. So this is probably a good time to talk about where to go from
now! I think that with the original idea of Xournalpp being the future of
Xournal, the name was appropriate, but now that it's not entirely clear
what is happening, it's unfortunate but that's kind of the way it is. After
this discussion I'll definitely add some historical notes on the Github
page for Xournalpp so that the state of the projects is more clear.
Since I mostly see new developments appearing on Github, my personal
recommendation would be to move Xournal development to Github and to use
Daniel's recommendations for official project branches (stable,
experimental, feature patches). That would at least consolidate development
on that project. As far as Xournalpp I think the projects should remain
separate but I'm open to suggestions. As for what I'll do, my plan was to
modify Xournalpp to have the features I wanted, and that's been mostly
accomplished now, so my in the next few months I plan to push out some
*.deb binaries and focus on polishing things up to the point where it's
easy for anyone to try it out.
One thing I'd really like to hear is Daniel's opinion on GTK3 and Windows
porting of Xournalpp. I'd certainly trust your expertise and if you say it
can be done, it's something I'd like to look at as well.
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Shuhao Wu <shu...@shuhaowu.com> wrote:
>
>> So yeah that's what I figured as well. It seems like everyone has their
>> own fork.
>>
>> While that seems to be beauty of opensource, this is just confusing and
>> bad for the end users.
>>
>> There are a lot of improvements that could be made to xournal, a lot of
>> which are already implemented. We should really get the authors to just
>> merge everything into a mainline repository. This will allow all users
>> to benefit. Developers who are interested will also have less of a hard
>> time trying to figure out what to contribute to.
>>
>> I would love to contribute some stuff into xournal[1], but with this
>> state I'm not sure which one is an non-outdated version, especially
>> since I see a lot of great features (esp the capstone student projects)
>> in forks.
>>
>> [1]: such as drawing horizontally and vertically aligned lines, drawing
>> rectangles and other shapes without recognition, and having lines draw
>> with the width determined by the pen pressure.
>>
>> As for xournal++... if it is a total rewrite I don't think it is
>> appropriate to use almost the same name. That just seems confusing (as
>> it did for me).
>>
>> Just my two cent.
>>
>> Shuhao
>>
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DreamFactory - Open Source REST & JSON Services for HTML5 & Native Apps
OAuth, Users, Roles, SQL, NoSQL, BLOB Storage and External API Access
Free app hosting. Or install the open source package on any LAMP server.
Sign up and see examples for AngularJS, jQuery, Sencha Touch and Native!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63469471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Xournal-devel mailing list
Xournal-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xournal-devel
