Re: GWindows and David Botton

[Fionn mac Cuimhaill <invisible@hiding.from.spam>]

On 26 Sep 2004 14:57:54 -0700, mcneills@landcareresearch.co.nz
(Stephen McNeill) wrote:

... snip ...
>
>It seems not many enjoy writing documentation... What a shame, I enjoy
>it.
>
>I updated the existing (Botton) documentation for my own use and added
>a reference manual, but I agree that it needs to be substantially
>updated, and preferably overhauled completely. If this project goes
>ahead with some kind of structure, I'd be happy to start working on
>the documentation and reference manual.

Very good - we should use your improvemenrs as a first step.

... snip ...

>I think the key thing is to get the package up to the point where it
>has the annoying bugs removed, and the basic capability smoothed out,
>and documentation provided, so that new users can have some confidence
>that using the package will be worth the investment in time. Then, and
>only then, I think it will be worthwhile adding new modules, covering
>new or expanded sections of the Windows API. That doesn't stop anyone
>developing new capabilities of course.

I pretty much agree here. My main reason for pushing ahead with the
printing stuff is that I have an immediate need for it.

The very first step should be to establish a new home for GWindows. I
looked at Sourceforge, and one of the things that it wants done in
setting up a new project there is to establish that the software
license really is an open-source license.

The GWindows license is the GNU GPL with this tweak:

"As a special exception,  if other files  instantiate  generics from
this  unit, or you link  this unit with other files  to produce an
executable,  this  unit  does not  by itself cause  the resulting
executable  to  be covered  by the  GNU  General  Public  License.
This exception does not however invalidate  any other reasons why  the
executable file  might be covered by the  GNU Public License."

Do we need to improve on this, or is this OK as it stands? We should
make sure that we have a good open-source license regardless of which
home GWindows finds, whether it be Sourceforge or some other place.
>
>Personally, I'm interested in extending the package in the multimedia
>area, as well as providing some capability for graphics.
Graphics will overlap with printing - I definitely approve.


>
>Stephen