Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control)

[Philip Mötteli]

Am Mittwoch, 22.10.03, um 22:30 Uhr (Europe/Zurich) schrieb Philippe 
C.D. Robert:
> On Wednesday, October 22, 2003, at 11:34  Uhr, Philip Mötteli wrote:
> > > > 2. Many programs do not use AppKit. E. g. servers and Web-programs.
> > >
> > > I know, there is a shortage of GNUstep apps, but you gotta admit 
> > > that a LOT of progress has been made this year!
> >
> > The hugest prograss is having WOF: GDL2 and GSWeb.
>
> This is your opinion. There are others, of course.

If you have read my postings, than you have surely noticed, that I 
started my posting with "just my 2c"? Ok. So if you excuse me of not 
having repeated this in every second phrase for you. And in any case, 
you don't need to remind me, that this is my opinion. Be assured, I 
know that.


> Besides it is funny that you mention these 2, as they are not part of 
> OpenStep at all,

This is out of the context: I never said GDL or GSW are part of 
OpenStep, but a big reason to make GS more widely known and used. 
That's unfair to produce the impression, I could have said that. Are 
you trying to let me look stupid?


> while in another mail you wrote:
>
> > Actually, you got exactly the point here: It's an API. It's the API 
> > called OpenStep. It's actually not a desktop, nor a filemanager, nor 
> > a project management tool, nor anthing else (though some programs are 
> > needed to be there, in order that this API makes sense, like 
> > pb-server). Because we it's "only" an API, we have it also on >> Windows.
>
> No, we do not have it on Windows, we have only parts of it working on 
> Windows, maybe we will have it at some point in the future. Maybe not. 
> So much about cross-platform API.

Again, have you read my postings? Please don't pronounce any opinion 
under your name, if you didn't read what your talking about: I've been 
initally talking about the most (in my eyes (just for you Phil!)) 
important thing to do concerning GS: completing and debugging GS on all 
platforms. With that, I specifically meant the version for Windows. 
Basically that's why I made this statement: Before making whole GS 
distributions and desktops and so on, we should complete, where the 
real point of GS as an OpenStep implementation is. But you didn't read 
that part, did you? But still making comments here? I don't feel good 
in correcting such comments, that make me look so stupid. Makes me 
aggressive, I'm sorry.


> Moreover, how can an API only make sense if it requires tools like 
> pb-server? This indicates to me that it actually is more than an API.

Why? An API offers a functionality. That's perhaps the reason, why it's 
not called a library.
Apart from that, if you don't agree with the naming, then ask NeXT or 
Apple. They called it like that.


> > > > You have me wondering… What are you thinking of?
> > > i'm making SimplyGNUstep
> > Nice, but how is the compatibility to the other managers like KDE? 
> > Unfortunately, most of the programs I use, are made for Gnome or KDE.
>
> Are you using them because you have no better alternative or are you 
> using them because they perfectly fit your needs?

I don't think that ever a program will perfectly fit my needs. It's 
always the best alternative, that I choose. Everything is relative here.


Re
Phil