Greg Hellings wrote:
On another hand, one could also point out that autotools is native to the SWORD library, is regularly updated when file names, directory structures and the like change. Thus, at any given point, a user could just pull the SVN tree and have a very high probability of things "just working." The Windows build files are maintained manually -- nearly every time I try to build from SVN on Windows (which is every 4-5 months, so not very regularly) thus far, I have had to edit the file list, or find compiler directives and defines, etc that need to be tweaked because of the manual system which does take a "poor cousin" seat all too often.
Autotools, VC++, and BCB project files all need to be maintained manually. There is no substantive difference there.
I think you're conflating the BCB projects (which have always been maintained, and are almost always current in SVN) with the VC++ projects (which were not maintained at all in the last few years since the only projects using them were a few pet projects of mine that I've long considered defunct). Now that I'm building Win32 utilities binaries with VC++, the VC++ project files will be consistently current as well.
(As an aside, I noticed last week that some header files were absent from the autotools projects, so presumably the Linux camp was briefly the poor cousin, though I don't know that anyone was actually affected by this omission.)
There are also file system paths on Windows which had not been tested, then were found to mishandle unicode. Last I heard, this was not resolved -- though I understand that it works fine in Linux.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that was an issue with Xiphos on Win32. I don't think BibleCS has any Unicode path issues.
Add to that the fact that BibleCS is given a highly pre-eminent position as "The SWORD Project for Windows" right off of the main site, but it hasn't finished being updated to work with the latest release of the library and definitely hasn't been released as such yet.
I'm unaware of any front end that has been updated to work with the particular feature of the latest release that is actually at issue here, viz. av11n. Other front ends have been released with 1.6.0 support lacking av11n, but since av11n is the most important feature to this thread (and the most significant feature of 1.6.0, IMO), there's not a significant advantage of Xiphos or BibleTime over BibleCS in this matter.
In summary, I don't think anyone needs to feel like a poor cousin. All of the project files should be equally well maintained now (or ill-maintained, depending on how you look at it). And everyone is in the same boat waiting for (or dreading the job of implementing) av11n support for their front end.
--Chris _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
