> well I'd be thrilled to contribute and I do use windows. actually I've > been going off it lately but I imagine it's cyclical. > What I would require is a crude explanation what is and how works C > and what is C ++ how is the same name for program language different > in windows and unix. I would need to know what these differences are > before I dived in and tried to figure stuff out > mick
Not to discourage anyone from contributing, because it's always welcome, but it's important to understand that the lack of Windows binaries is not solely related to 'the lack of someone to compile them,' which I think is what Yuv was getting at originally before the flame war erupted. What is needed is someone to do for the Windows side what Yuval (previously) did for the general releases: Someone who can shepherd the platform, maintain it, and support it. For example, what happens if someone has a crash that is only on Windows? Who will be responsible for tracking it down, getting diagnostic information, etc? Who will maintain the installer, ensuring everything gets put in its proper place? And let's not forget dependencies - and all their myriad configurations. When development progresses, will the person building binaries have the necessary knowledge and skill to keep their environment up to date - and to ensure that when it's prepared for end-users, it's kept as simple and clean as possible? There has definitely been a lot of interest in getting Windows compiled - which is great, as it's a good beginners step into this. However, judging by the questions on the list so far, it doesn't seem like (and I hope I'm not offending anyone when I say this) that no one who has stepped up really understands what the challenges were and are, and that the same quality concerns may persist once your first 'hugin.exe' is sitting in your output directory. I've seen suggestions about possible installer scripts and the like - except there is already an installer script that, while valid for 0.7.0, definitely needs polish and attention. I've seen a lot of questions about dependencies and compilation bugs (on all platforms, for that matter), when many of the questions are already answered on the Wiki. While yes, I'm aware that sounds dangerously close to the anti-user "RTFM", it really cannot be understated how important that step is. In terms of what has (historically) prevented a 0.8.0 release, consider the following: - No one has stepped up to own the installer. A huge amount of work is already done, but there is still significant work to be done to put together an end-user-friendly, international-law-abiding installer. - No one has stepped up for the 'cat herding' task of building a plan for how a Windows release might go. Once the binaries are built (which, not to insult anyone, really is the easiest part), how will they get tested on the various platforms? How will feedback be collected? How will issues be addressed - Windows specific issues, installer issues, platform issues? - What about 32-bit and 64-bit binaries? They *are* different, they *do* have different build steps and, while their dependencies are the same, actually resolving those dependencies requires quite a few different steps. For Linux and Mac this is much easier, but on a platform like Windows, with a build system like CMake, a compiler like MSVC, and a (justifiable) policy of static linking, this is a whole new set of challenges. - How will the exes be 'audited'? Consider that in the case of Linux, you're often building from source or seeing it distributed by your distro vendor - which is a nice clean audit trail of "no back doors". For Mac and Windows, when shipping binary versions, there is a matter of trust - trust which takes time to establish (as Harry has). Certainly that needs to be a consideration, even as a community with no specific liability. For those who are realizing that this task is a lot larger than perhaps they'd realized, or that it involves a set of skills that they may not necessarily have, don't be disheartened - there are still ways to contribute. Testing and feedback will always be a necessary part, just as interface design and behaviour will be important as well. While I can understand how Yuval's message seems to have got lost or misinterpreted, I would absolutely agree with the concerns he expressed on his personal page regarding the significance of this task, and why it is frustrating when people are frequently asking on list. It's not that there is anything wrong for asking, it's just that it's not nearly as simple as people may think it is, and it's misguided and potentially insulting to insist that it is, as some have in the past. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
