Am Donnerstag, 07.07.05 um 08:41 Uhr schrieb Philip Mötteli:
Hi
Am 07.07.2005 um 00:13 schrieb Wolfgang Sourdeau:
La plume légère, vers Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 03:13:58PM -0400, heure
d'inspiration,
Adam Fedor écrivait en ces mots:
What can we do to make this happen? Could we buy someone a dedicated
Windows computer if they promised to work on the Windows port?
Perhaps pay a Windows programmer to help us?
IMO, getting GNUstep to work correctly on Windows is something
important
too. But it is probably not as important to fix now than to fix other
incompatibilities with Mac OSX. People who will use the Windows port
are
likely to be interested in it because of GNUstep's compatibility with
the OSX api (otherwise they'd probably just use GNUstep for
GNU/Linux).
And although we're (slowly) getting there, I think there are too many
important little things to fix beforehand. And for that matter,
sticking
on one platform brings more benefits:
1) it avoids the disappointing that people could feel when trying
something that sometimes works and sometimes doesn't;
2) it let us focus on the inner problems rather than both the inner
problems and the cross-platform issues.
Besides, having enough stability in GNUstep will likely attract more
developers.
That's exactly the reason, why I do not agree with this opinion.
Having a Windows port, which allows most developers to port their
software to Windows, by just investing no more than 3% of their
software's cost, would attract so many developers, that this would
bring on GNUstep much quicker, than a perfect version of OpenStep
running only on Linux.
I mean, after all, we had that situation for years now: GNUstep works
well on Linux, but has not been interesting for most of the
developers. The big potential of OpenStep developers are Mac
developers and Mac developers don't targetLinux, they target Windows.
If we want those developers to help GNUstep, we have to change their
perception of GNUstep's Windows port.
By just concentrating our few tiny little forces to make just one
Linux port, but perfectly and complete, we will never arrive there,
because of too little manpower.
In my eyes, the manpower lies in GNUstep's Windows port. And the
manpower is, in my eyes, GNUstep's only problem.
True words, I could not have expressed this better.
Re
Phil
Lars
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnustep mailing list
Discuss-gnustep@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
_______________________________________________
Gnustep-dev mailing list
Gnustep-dev@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev