On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 21:24, Gregory Casamento wrote: > I would like to change the names of these things to things that both > Cocoa and OpenStep developers are more familiar with. It would be > nice to have them as Foundation/AppKit and etc. This would make it > easier to talk about GNUstep with people without having to constantly > say "base, GNUstep's version of Foundation" and the like. > > I'm working on a patch to make this happen, but I would like to know > if anyone has any misgivings about this before I commit it.
This question was brought up two months ago as well. David then argued that base is not *just* Foundation. On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:29, David Chisnall wrote: > I think I'd like to see -base and -gui remain the names for the projects, > but not for the frameworks. -base should include Foundation and > CoreFoundation, -gui should include AppKit and UIKit (and maybe > CoreGraphics), and both should include Additions. > > I wouldn't like to see -base renamed Foundation, because that implies > that it just implements Foundation - I have a fair amount of code that > depends on GNUstep stuff that won't work with another Foundation > implementation, but will work with -base. I guess if base and gui are renamed Foundation and AppKit, then the additions should be made separate frameworks so that using the standard names actually *does* show exactly what they include. This is probably not so easy to do, though? In a perfect world, it would then be possible to compile the additions on OS X to run code on Cocoa that uses GNUstep specific APIs. -Truls _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
