[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integ
From: |
Manuel Guesdon |
Subject: |
Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration |
Date: |
Tue, 2 Mar 2004 10:40:59 +0100 (CET) |
On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 02:05:18 +0100 Helge Hess <helge.hess@opengroupware.org>
wrote:
>| On 02.03.2004, at 01:11, Manuel Guesdon wrote:
>| Yes, it was a company decision which isn't worth to be discussed. I
>| hope you remember that I explained to you various things on how WO
>| worked as well as contributed major parts of your initial
>| implementation.
Major part, really ?
>| Do you still remember who wrote NGAntlr initially? ;-)
Yes, at it is mentionned is the README files.
>| > Funny note about testing and usability, we have a GNUstepWeb have
>| > application which is used by more than 40000 people each month,
>| > serving more than 200 000 pages each month for near a year.
>|
>| Yes, you actually have an application, great :-) I have no doubts that
>| gstep-web does just fine for your specific case, so do you developer
>| gstep-web just for that customer?
>| NGObjWeb has thousand of installed servers, not just one.
OK. You have an application on several servers. Well.
>| > I think Dave have similar exemple.
>|
>| Dave?
David Wetzel
>| > After reading last messages, I worry about the future of GNUstep
>| > project as Helge see it. After years of proprietary development, he
>| > sudenly suggest to share things.
>|
>| You are really spreading FUD here. Just take a look in:
>|
>| ftp://ftp.gnustep.org/pub/gnustep/contrib/
>|
Before writing this, I checked contrib, of course, but I was rather thinking
about really
integration in gnustep.
>| Get to the ground and open your eyes.
Thanks.
>| > But I don't think it's reasonnable
>| > to say "hey just drop this because we have a better one" without even
>| > knowing exactly what we talking about.
>|
>| I know what I'm talking about. While I'm watching gnustep-web the whole
>| time, you didn't take a single look at SOPE,
I've take a look at it.
>| yet you are claiming that
>| I do not know what I'm talking about.
Yes, about gsweb.
>| In short: the goal of your project isn't WebObjects compatibility, it
>| is some other goals you have (but didn't line out).
Please. I've wrote a lot of things in it I don't use, just to improve
compatibility but yes, I didn't write a raw HTML parser
because I was preferring using existing parser.
>| > So, after reading last posts, I'd like to be sure about the direction
>| > of projects. If the goal is only to give more mainteners to OOg/Skyrix
>| > projects, I don't agree.
>|
>| You make it sound like a one way direction, as if gnustep-web
>| participants can't gain anything from SOPE.
At least one other person understanted your message like me. I've never said
gnustep-web people
have nothing to gain, I just say that IMHO, direction and goals are/was not
clear.
>| So while I'm open to any suggestions, it might be worth to fork a new
>| project focusing on a WO clone.
Great. I prefer this way.
>| Whether this is named gnustep-web or
>| SOPE or xxx - I don't care.
I don't care too much about naming too.
>| > To summarize, I'm open, I'm happy to see contributions, I'll be happy
>| > to merge NGObjWeb and GSWeb but I don't want to see GNUstep projects
>| > taking some out of control way and I just can't say to people using
>| > gsweb or to my
>| > customers "hey, we'll drop this so you'll have to rewrite and test
>| > part of your applications; Are you happy ?".
>|
>| So you are actually more bound to your customers than to providing a
>| viable framework. Which is understandable but certainly doesn't match a
>| community project like GNUstep very well.
Please stop FUD. I'm not the only one to use gsweb and I just say that people
who
have developped applications based on gsweb probably don't want to see it just
dropped; like you won't just drop NGObjWeb from OOg to replace it by a
something
else just next week.
Manuel
--
______________________________________________________________________
Manuel Guesdon - ORANGE CONCEPT <mguesdon@orange-concept.com>
14 rue Jean-Baptiste Clement - 93200 Saint-Denis - France
Tel: +33 1 4940 0997 - Fax: +33 1 4940 0998
- Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Adam Fedor, 2004/03/01
- Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Manuel Guesdon, 2004/03/01
- Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Helge Hess, 2004/03/02
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration,
Manuel Guesdon <=
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Helge Hess, 2004/03/02
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Manuel Guesdon, 2004/03/02
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Helge Hess, 2004/03/02
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Alex Perez, 2004/03/03
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Fred Kiefer, 2004/03/03
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Helge Hess, 2004/03/03
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Pete French, 2004/03/04
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Gregory John Casamento, 2004/03/08
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Helge Hess, 2004/03/08
- Re: [GSWHackers] Re: OGo/GNUstep cooperation Re: Re[2]: Frameworks, NeXT, 2004/03/10