[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: What should and should not go in?
From: |
Gregory John Casamento |
Subject: |
Re: What should and should not go in? |
Date: |
Sat, 24 Jan 2004 08:26:01 -0800 (PST) |
--- Richard Frith-Macdonald <richard@brainstorm.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On 24 Jan 2004, at 05:25, Gregory John Casamento wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > I am wondering where all of the fuss about "this was not in OpenStep
> > and
> > therefore shouldn't go in" is coming from, as I've been hearing this a
> > lot
> > lately.
>
> It's not coming from the GNUstep developers anyway ... I have not
> noticed
> any GNUstep developer say that all MacOS-X extensions should be kept
> out of GNUstep. Even Alexanders objections to NSToolBar (which are
> specific to that class) might well be swayed if someone contributed
> good,
> clean, simple. mantainable code.
I hope so. :)
> > OpenStep is a standard that was created in 1994, a decade ago, that
> > standard is dated to say the least. So, why would we want to tie
> > ourselves to
> > this especially when MOSX represents an extension of it?
>
> I believe our policy statement has (for a long, long time) said that we
> are
> (and will remain) OpenStep compatible AND that we track changes in
> MacOS-X
> to remain compatible with that. To me, that's pretty clear.
> The website also used to say that where the two are incompatible we will
> find workarounds and superior solutions :-)
>
> What we need is to clearly define the types of things we
> should/shouldn't
Agreed.
> > include in GNUstep. Using the recent NSToolbar spat as an example, I,
> > personally, believe that we should put it in, despite any technical
> > objections,
> > simply because it's used by a number of applications under MOSX and,
> > with it's
> > inclusion, we'll attract those who've used it. Now, I'm not saying
> > that there
> > are tens of thousands of developers who want to use NSToolbar. No.
> > I'm
> > asserting that the more we stray from MOSX, the more we loose potential
> > developers and users.
>
> Yes.
>
> Where MacOS-X classes are missing, it's because nobody has contributed
> a good implementation yet, not because there is any hidden policy to
> keep
> them out.
>
I know. I added a list of the unimplemented classes to the tasks list. My
concern was that I thought I was hearing a sentiment recently which was against
putting anything in that's not in the original spec.
GJC
=====
Gregory John Casamento -- CEO/President Open Logic Corp.
-- bheron on #gnustep, #linuxstep, & #gormtalk ----------------
Please sign the petition against software patents at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/pasp01/petition.html
-- Maintainer of Gorm (featured in April Linux Journal) -------
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/