[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control

From: Riccardo Mottola
Subject: Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 13:39:16 +0200
User-agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022


I think I have to agree here... at least partially.

on 10/16/03 1:13 PM, Philippe C.D. Robert at address@hidden wrote:

> Let me give an example, many ex OpenStep developers and maybe even Cocoa
> developers were(are?) interested in porting their stuff to GNUstep
> (mostly running under X11) assuming it would be some sort of an OPENSTEP
> or Mac OS X replacement. Something which makes them independent from
> NeXT or Apple, something which gives them a real alternative. But what
> they actually find is a set of libraries which allows them to port their
> apps, but which does not (and IMHO cannot really) integrate into the
> environment of choice (GNOME, KDE, CDE ... ) - be it because of
> different philosophies (GUI) or implementation "details" (eg. copy and
> paste and so on). As a result only a few really spend time working with
> GNUstep because GNUstep as such is not the alternative most of them are
> looking for. At least this is my experience...
Personally, this is why I got involved in GNUstep. The idea of having a sort
of OpenStep clone on unix, using X11. The look and feel, the user experience
but also the portability of existing application. And the quite easy
cross-platform development for os-x.
I'm not interested in GNOME or KDE. I don't like them. So personally I like
a complete "NeXT" interface.
On the other side, having  appications that can run inside CDE, GNOME or KDE
can be useful with some customers you may think of developing software for.
Or you happen to export display to one of these computers. And if you ever
tried GNUstep in an environment with mouse-focus like a typical CDE, Fvwm,
Twm... you wil get mad with focus on menus and those stupid mini-windows. SO
there are other small aspects that may scare away.

> To make it short I believe that GNUstep would be far more successful if
> it was "only" a X11 based desktop solution than a crossplattform API
> which has to integrate into other desktops. But this discussion is an
> old one and off topic anyway, I guess. So excuse me for writing this,
> but I just had to ... :-)
I don't hink "only" is the correct term, but "too". GNUstep is an
implementation of the OpenStep api. Tha tis a good thing (TM). I think it
should be also reproduce the Desktop experience.

At the end GNUstep should be both cocoa (the APIs) and Aqua (the user
interface) to use MacosX terms. This is my personal view.

But I thin we are making step forwards for example with GWorkspace. If we
get a good window manager and a preference application I think we are on the
good way. Put in some "usr" applications... and you are at a quite good
point I think.

-My two cents

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]