The need for an official GNUstep desktop
All,All of this discussion on the list has made my consider that GNUstep needs to resolve this confusion once and for all. Are we a desktop or a development environment? I believe that we can, and should, be both. One of the steps we need to take towards doing this is the creation of another project which will be the official GNUstep desktop.Up until now we've had 4 or 5 projects playing at being the official desktop in an effort to fill the void.I believe that all of this is senseless duplication and that what we need is a *coordinated* effort towards making a cohesive and attractive GNUstep desktop environment. We need to focus on what will make an exciting and easy experience for both users and developers. Whether it is done in the same repository as GNUstep or in a separate one, that's up for debug.Does anyone have any thoughts or ideas on the above?Thanks, GJC--Gregory John Casamento___ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
Re: The need for an official GNUstep desktop
Gregory John Casamento wrote: All, All of this discussion on the list has made my consider that GNUstep needs to resolve this confusion once and for all. Are we a desktop or a development environment? I believe that we can, and should, be both. One of the steps we need to take towards doing this is the creation of another project which will be the official GNUstep desktop. Up until now we've had 4 or 5 projects playing at being the official desktop in an effort to fill the void. I believe that all of this is senseless duplication and that what we need is a *coordinated* effort towards making a cohesive and attractive GNUstep desktop environment. We need to focus on what will make an exciting and easy experience for both users and developers. Whether it is done in the same repository as GNUstep or in a separate one, that's up for debug. Does anyone have any thoughts or ideas on the above? Thanks, GJC -- Gregory John Casamento ___ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev I'd much rather prefer GNUstep to stay a cross-platform API and development environment, rather than trying to be a bit of everything. It would hurt commercial applicability of GNUstep, such as we do at our company, if I had to deploy tons of other software together with my GNUstep app. Some for of coordination between a full-blown desktop and the GNUstep development framework would be nice, of course, but it should not directly affect GNUstep development. I'd rather see the relationship between GNUstep and it's "official" desktop be something like GTK+ or Qt are to all DEs built on it - they are foundations of them, but is also usable to build stand-alone apps. -- Saso ___ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
Re: The need for an official GNUstep desktop
On 8/27/06, Sašo Kiselkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'd much rather prefer GNUstep to stay a cross-platform API and
development environment, rather than trying to be a bit of everything.
It would hurt commercial applicability of GNUstep, such as we do at our
company, if I had to deploy tons of other software together with my
GNUstep app. Some for of coordination between a full-blown desktop and
the GNUstep development framework would be nice, of course, but it
should not directly affect GNUstep development. I'd rather see the
relationship between GNUstep and it's "official" desktop be something
like GTK+ or Qt are to all DEs built on it - they are foundations of
them, but is also usable to build stand-alone apps.
I agree. Other reasons are that you'd need to reach an agreement about
what exactly this yet-another-gnustep-desktop project would be, which
in my experience is not that simple ^_^ , particularly if it's
supposed to be the "official one", and also that considering that not
many persons are working on the existing gnustep desktop projects _at
the moment_ (I mean, not many persons are working on gnustep itself
!), I don't really know how much persons will work in the end on this
hypothetical new desktop.
In fact... I'm starting more and more to think that GNUstep, instead
of trying to be a jack of all trades -- I mean, it's a programming
toolkit, no, a development environment with RAD, no, a web application
server, no, a desktop with a filemanager... etc. -- should "split"
into its sub projects ("technically" not, perhaps, but "publically"
yes).
Letting each sub-project stands on its own would enormously improve
the outside readability of the whole, and, I think, help attracting
new people more easily. It's perhaps a simple as (yet again) working
on the website to put everything into a "GNUstep" umbrella, but having
different, clearly separated sections...
Beside, coming back on the desktop idea, what exactly is wrong with,
ah, say, étoilé ;-) ? (it's not like we are not happily welcoming new
members or not doing any progresses)
--
Nicolas Roard
"I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly
by." -- Douglas Adams
___
Gnustep-dev mailing list
Gnustep-dev@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
Re: The need for an official GNUstep desktop
On 2006-08-27 22:35:37 +0200 Nicolas Roard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
[...]
In fact... I'm starting more and more to think that GNUstep, instead
of trying to be a jack of all trades -- I mean, it's a programming
toolkit, no, a development environment with RAD, no, a web application
server, no, a desktop with a filemanager... etc. -- should "split"
into its sub projects ("technically" not, perhaps, but "publically"
yes).
[...]
I am aware that I do not have much say in this issue, but nevertheless
I think Nicolas is absolutely right here.
As Greg points out, GNUstep CAN be both, but as Saso indicates,
GNUstep is first and foremost a development framework.
However, the above has some merit -- why not 'split' GNUstep in two
_official_ parts (and I think that is what Greg had in mind)
a) GNUstep Core -- the development framework, as it is right now
b) GNUstep Desktop -- well, the desktop itself.
The advantage would be that man-power can be pooled. So instead of
several people trying to re-invent the wheel, they will focus on ONE
(hopefully) perfect desktop, instead of several, and instead of trying
to figure out work-arounds, fixes will float back into GNUstep-Core.
Another advantage, as already pointed out by Greg, would be
_coordination_ which currently IS missing with the development of
Etoile and GWorkspace (sorry to say that). Not to mention the ones
that never meet the light of day err are released into the public due
to lack of man-power...
Plus, since it would be an official desktop, the source could (or
should) be located in the same SVN as GNUstep (Core), so it will be
much easier to get to it. Right now, you will have to KNOW where to
get GNUstep, Etoile, etc. Having a complete development and desktop
environment downloadable from ONE location, would be a tremendous
advantage.
Just my .02c
--
Chris
___
Gnustep-dev mailing list
Gnustep-dev@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
Re: The need for an official GNUstep desktop
Hi!
Am 27.08.2006 um 23:56 schrieb Chris Vetter:
However, the above has some merit -- why not 'split' GNUstep in two
_official_ parts (and I think that is what Greg had in mind)
a) GNUstep Core -- the development framework, as it is right now
b) GNUstep Desktop -- well, the desktop itself.
I think that's a good idea. I'd prefer 'GNUstep Frameworks' for the
name of the development framework, though. It makes clearer what it
is. ('GNUstep Core' could also be the name of the GNUstep Base Library.)
For cooperation with Etoile and inclusion of existing applications,
it would be helpful if the license requirements allowed to include
code which is not GPL-licensed.
Another advantage, as already pointed out by Greg, would be
_coordination_ which currently IS missing with the development of
Etoile and GWorkspace (sorry to say that). Not to mention the ones
that never meet the light of day err are released into the public
due to lack of man-power...
True. It definitely lacks. I vote for it. :-)
-Günther
___
Gnustep-dev mailing list
Gnustep-dev@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
Re: The need for an official GNUstep desktop
Am 27.08.2006 um 21:23 schrieb Gregory John Casamento: Up until now we've had 4 or 5 projects playing at being the official desktop in an effort to fill the void. Yepp. And looking at NeXTbuntu and MidnightBSD, even full OS releases appear to be in fashion right now. What I do not understand is, what's wrong with all the various package managers each distro has? Instead of putting up an entire Linux or BSD fork, creating or refining packages in each native package mananger for GNUstep would be the most straightforward thing to do, IMHO. One package for -make, -base, each app, and so on. Plus a meta- package for getting a full runtime-environment, a full development environment and a full desktop environment. The latter should allow to get rid of any other graphical environment (KDE, Gnome, maybe even X), without hosing GNUstep's workings. *snap* there you have your GNUstep distro (of course it's not developed by a snap but for the user it could/should be). Markus - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dipl. Ing. Markus Hitter http://www.jump-ing.de/ ___ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
Re: The need for an official GNUstep desktop
As someone who tends to lurk more than anything, I agree. This would go a long way towards improving acceptability. WindowMaker and GSWorkspace are good start, but I desktop goes a little bit further. Andy /* Satori & Associates, Inc. / On Aug 27, 2006, at 3:23 PM, Gregory John Casamento wrote: All, All of this discussion on the list has made my consider that GNUstep needs to resolve this confusion once and for all. Are we a desktop or a development environment? I believe that we can, and should, be both. One of the steps we need to take towards doing this is the creation of another project which will be the official GNUstep desktop. Up until now we've had 4 or 5 projects playing at being the official desktop in an effort to fill the void. I believe that all of this is senseless duplication and that what we need is a *coordinated* effort towards making a cohesive and attractive GNUstep desktop environment. We need to focus on what will make an exciting and easy experience for both users and developers. Whether it is done in the same repository as GNUstep or in a separate one, that's up for debug. Does anyone have any thoughts or ideas on the above? Thanks, GJC -- Gregory John Casamento ___ 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
Re: The need for an official GNUstep desktop
> WindowMaker and GSWorkspace are good start, but I desktop goes a > little bit further. One of the things which has begun to worry me recently is the fact that WindowMaker seems to be becomming a bit of a dead end. It's our "official" window manager isn't it ? Yet it still doesnt work right in 64 bit mode, and the development lists seem very dead (aside from the recnt flurry of people wanting to fork off something). One upon a time I am sure there was a bundle someone made for GNUStep which enabled any application to act as a window manager. It would be very nice if such a thing could be incorporated into GSWorkspace so I could have an entirely GNUStep system - and as a bonus it would quit when GSWorkspace exitted just like nextStep used to. Is the bundle still around, and is this a practical thing to think of doing ? -bat. [still unable to run entirely 64 bit due to Windowmaker] ___ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
Re: The need for an official GNUstep desktop
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Pete French wrote: >> WindowMaker and GSWorkspace are good start, but I desktop goes a >> little bit further. > > One of the things which has begun to worry me recently is the fact that > WindowMaker seems to be becomming a bit of a dead end. It's our "official" > window manager isn't it ? Yet it still doesnt work right in 64 bit mode, > and the development lists seem very dead (aside from the recnt flurry of > people wanting to fork off something). > > > One upon a time I am sure there was a bundle someone made for GNUStep > which enabled any application to act as a window manager. It would be very > nice if such a thing could be incorporated into GSWorkspace so I > could have an entirely GNUStep system - and as a bonus it would quit > when GSWorkspace exitted just like nextStep used to. > > Is the bundle still around, and is this a practical thing to think > of doing ? > > -bat. [still unable to run entirely 64 bit due to Windowmaker] > A new window manager needs to be written but then again its just a very big job. Im more inclined to simplify the desktop and build something that can evolve while still being useful in the immediate term. - -- things i hate about my linux pc: 1. it takes more than a second to boot up 2. keeps asking about filenames and directories 3. does not remember what i was working on yesterday 4. does not remember all changes i have ever made 5. cannot figure out necessary settings by itself -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFE8kDgyihxuQOYt8wRAns/AJ9RY94ZB2Dt9itxAyiJQiSm+0uRfQCfT20Z C6eYOIVwYBNRgglxhGZuDK4= =l+wF -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
Re: The need for an official GNUstep desktop
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Markus Hitter wrote: > > Am 27.08.2006 um 21:23 schrieb Gregory John Casamento: > >> Up until now we've had 4 or 5 projects playing at being the official >> desktop in an effort to fill the void. > > Yepp. And looking at NeXTbuntu and MidnightBSD, even full OS releases > appear to be in fashion right now. > > What I do not understand is, what's wrong with all the various package > managers each distro has? Instead of putting up an entire Linux or BSD > fork, creating or refining packages in each native package mananger for > GNUstep would be the most straightforward thing to do, IMHO. > > One package for -make, -base, each app, and so on. Plus a meta-package > for getting a full runtime-environment, a full development environment > and a full desktop environment. The latter should allow to get rid of > any other graphical environment (KDE, Gnome, maybe even X), without > hosing GNUstep's workings. *snap* there you have your GNUstep distro (of > course it's not developed by a snap but for the user it could/should be). > Well thats good enough to get a run gworkspace. But how do you configure the network? and add users? or even list running processes in a window? or get more packages? you end up with terminal.app and calling apitude. thats what happened to me. its not an integrated feel. you still need to abstract the platform away. and thats a very complex job. how does openstep for NT do it? you will need: gnustep for suse gnustep for red hat gnustep for ubuntu gnustep for debian etc etc for me its not good enough specially when im concerned about bootup time and ease of installation. - -- things i hate about my linux pc: 1. it takes more than a second to boot up 2. keeps asking about filenames and directories 3. does not remember what i was working on yesterday 4. does not remember all changes i have ever made 5. cannot figure out necessary settings by itself -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFE8v3GyihxuQOYt8wRAuUFAJwPayEXqFV2yfndZZUv4BFi4NwFGgCgq32f X18GjTEhmmXoSRY++fQxTak= =19fg -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
Re: The need for an official GNUstep desktop
Hey, On Monday, August 28, 2006, at 01:43 AM, Pete French wrote: could have an entirely GNUStep system - and as a bonus it would quit when GSWorkspace exitted just like nextStep used to. you can already do that, just configure your x session properly: first launch wmaker as if it weere "xclock" and then launch gworkspace as if it were a windowmanager. thus when you quit gworkspace, you exit. I have this setup on a test-box. But beware, if gnustep goes nuts (and IT DOES, from time to time, in a diffiuclt to reproduce manner) you see the screen flashing and a login window or a shell prompt. cheers, Riccardo ___ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
Re: Re: The need for an official GNUstep desktop
Many usable applications are scattering around and most of them are one-man-projects. Below is the list I have in mind. To me, these applications are sufficient to be a nice desktop environment after some polish. I think it will be better to have everything in one place and all developers can peek into each project from time to time. And regarding to the vision of desktop environment, let's have a regular one before an evolutionary one. GWorkspace (http://www.gnustep.it/enrico/gworkspace/) GNUMail (http://www.collaboration-world.com/gnumail) Terminal (http://www.nongnu.org/backbone) Azalea (http://www.etoile-project.org) - window manager EtoileMenuServer (http://www.etoile-project.org) - menu bar Camaelon (http://www.etoile-project.org) - theme engine TalkSoup (http://talksoup.aeruder.net/) - IRC client Grr (http://www.etoile-project.org) - RSS reader Dictionary (http://www.etoile-project.org) Preview (http://home.gna.org/gsimageapps/) - image viewer Vindaloo (http://home.gna.org/gsimageapps/) - PDF viewer Affiche (http://www.collaboration-world.com/affiche), a post-it application Yen-Ju ___ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
Re: Re: Re: The need for an official GNUstep desktop
On 8/27/06, Yen-Ju Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Many usable applications are scattering around and most of them are one-man-projects. Below is the list I have in mind. To me, these applications are sufficient to be a nice desktop environment after some polish. I think it will be better to have everything in one place and all developers can peek into each project from time to time. While I think it is a good idea to have applications of a desktop environment in one place, it may not be with GNUstep "core". Here is an argument for similar situation: http://www.rubyinside.com/does-ruby-need-more-opinions-207.html GNUstep is more powerful than a foundation for a desktop environment. Because of the tight relation between GTK/GNOME, Qt/KDE, no one will try to use GTK and Qt to write server applications. ( Well, the argument here is not completely right here since GTK and Qt start as widget toolkit for xwindow. ) If we have a desktop environment with GNUstep "core" in one place, people might think GNUstep is just like GTK/Qt. Having GNUstep "core" and desktop environment in two places is not too bad for users. At least GNUstep won't be shadowed if the desktop environment successes. Yen-Ju ___ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
