Re: The goal of GNUstep 1.0

2005-11-05 Thread Fred Kiefer
David Ayers wrote: Fred Kiefer schrieb: On the more down to the bits side, I would like to see a stable memory layout for all GUI classes. This has two aspects, we are still missing some ivars that will be needed for full OpenStep/Cocoa compliance. The other side is that we could use more bit

Re: The goal of GNUstep 1.0

2005-11-01 Thread Richard Frith-Macdonald
On 30 Oct 2005, at 16:13, David Ayers wrote: Fred Kiefer schrieb: On the more down to the bits side, I would like to see a stable memory layout for all GUI classes. This has two aspects, we are still missing some ivars that will be needed for full OpenStep/Cocoa compliance. The

RE: The goal of GNUstep 1.0 (Why Unanimous Consent Doesn't Work)

2005-10-27 Thread Fabien VALLON
On Mer 26 octobre 2005 17:45, Adam Fedor wrote: What bugs are you talking about? Perhaps we should prioritize the bugs in the bug database... Maybye a TODO list ( Roadmap ) before a 1.0 ? Or maybye put all this TODO list in the bug system with a special entry/status ? I checked quickly some

Re: The goal of GNUstep 1.0 (Why Unanimous Consent Doesn't Work)

2005-10-27 Thread Fabien VALLON
On Mer 26 octobre 2005 20:32, Nicolas Roard wrote: On 10/26/05, Fabien VALLON [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You will never release GNUstep if you follow Apple. Of course, I didn't advocate to hold GNUstep until we're 100% compatible with current Cocoa.. I was merely pointing that OpenStep

RE: The goal of GNUstep 1.0 (Why Unanimous Consent Doesn't Work)

2005-10-27 Thread Fabien VALLON
On Mer 26 octobre 2005 19:50, Adam Fedor wrote: -Original Message- From: Fabien VALLON * Check if all OpenStep methods/classes are implemented and if not, implement them or add it in documentation ( ex: in http://gnustep.org/resources/documentation/Developer/Gui/Gener

Re: The goal of GNUstep 1.0

2005-10-27 Thread Fabien VALLON
On Jeu 27 octobre 2005 18:33, Adrian Robert wrote: On Oct 27, 2005, at 9:06 AM, Fabien VALLON wrote: On Mer 26 octobre 2005 17:45, Adam Fedor wrote: What bugs are you talking about? Perhaps we should prioritize the bugs in the bug database... Maybye a TODO list ( Roadmap ) before a

Re: The goal of GNUstep 1.0

2005-10-27 Thread Nicola Pero
In Foundation, NSNumberFormatter still needs work (Fred just recently started on it), and perhaps we should add the NSMessagePort implementation on Windows that Richard has talked about to the 1.0 list? I don't know if someone is willing to work on it, but I feel a fully functional

Re: The goal of GNUstep 1.0 (Why Unanimous Consent Doesn't Work)

2005-10-27 Thread Matt Rice
i'll just pick a random post, and reply to this one... --- Richard Frith-Macdonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2005-10-26 12:13:41 +0100 Dennis Leeuw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1. window manager interaction ... I want clicking on windows to work *reliably*, so that when I click on

Re: The goal of GNUstep 1.0 (Why Unanimous Consent Doesn't Work)

2005-10-26 Thread Dennis Leeuw
Hi Richard, Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote: On 2005-10-26 08:49:52 +0100 Dennis Leeuw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it is a clear goal. Something we can all agree on, I don't think there isn't anybody who doesn't want GNUstep to become 1.0. We just need a list of things to be done and a

Re: The goal of GNUstep 1.0 (Why Unanimous Consent Doesn't Work)

2005-10-26 Thread Peter Cooper
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 04:55:22PM +0200, Fabien VALLON wrote: On Mer 26 octobre 2005 15:29, Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote: So, to get back to the 1.0 release idea ... Highest priority ... fixing bugs that annoy people when they are using the gui (I'm sure other people use different apps

Re: The goal of GNUstep 1.0 (Why Unanimous Consent Doesn't Work)

2005-10-26 Thread Nicolas Roard
On 10/26/05, Adam Fedor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: Fabien VALLON For the 1.0 release, what do you think about an OpenStep-compliant release ? - This is the first goal of GNUstep. - There is already some bugs to fix for OpenStep-compliants classes. -

RE: The goal of GNUstep 1.0 (Why Unanimous Consent Doesn't Work)

2005-10-26 Thread Fabien VALLON
On Mer 26 octobre 2005 17:45, Adam Fedor wrote: -Original Message- From: Fabien VALLON For the 1.0 release, what do you think about an OpenStep-compliant release ? - This is the first goal of GNUstep. - There is already some bugs to fix for OpenStep-compliants classes. - There

Re: The goal of GNUstep 1.0 (Why Unanimous Consent Doesn't Work)

2005-10-26 Thread Fabien VALLON
On Mer 26 octobre 2005 18:00, Nicolas Roard wrote: On 10/26/05, Adam Fedor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: Fabien VALLON For the 1.0 release, what do you think about an OpenStep-compliant release ? - This is the first goal of GNUstep. - There is already

RE: The goal of GNUstep 1.0 (Why Unanimous Consent Doesn't Work)

2005-10-26 Thread Adam Fedor
-Original Message- From: Fabien VALLON * Check if all OpenStep methods/classes are implemented and if not, implement them or add it in documentation ( ex: in http://gnustep.org/resources/documentation/Developer/Gui/Gener al/OpenStepCompliance.html Nothing about NSBTreeBlock and

Re: The goal of GNUstep 1.0 (Why Unanimous Consent Doesn't Work)

2005-10-26 Thread Nicolas Roard
On 10/26/05, Fabien VALLON [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: By that I mean that if there are some obscure deprecated methods that we don't have yet, I'm not sure it's worth implementing them/delay a 1.0 just to claim hey we're _fully_ OpenStep compliant ! -- it's not like many people care about