Slashdot Mirror


GNUstep Project Gets New Chief Maintainer

stivi writes "OSNews is reporting that Gregory Casamento has accepted the position of GNUstep Maintainer. Adam Fedor, former GNUstep leader writes: 'After over 15 years of being the Chief Maintainer for GNUstep, I've found I have too many other responsibilities to devote as much time to GNUstep as is necessary. I still plan on contributing to GNUstep in the future in a lower capacity.' Gregory has been a prolific developer for GNUstep for the past seven years and is currently the maintainer for Gorm (the graphical interface designer) and the GUI library. I think he will make a great choice to lead GNUstep in the future. New plans for change have been set up already. Thank you Adam for the past, congratulations Gregory to the future."

12 of 129 comments (clear)

  1. Direction by bsharitt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hopefully we see GNUStep get some definitive direction to show the world that it's still alive. Most people think it's a legacy development tool kit which at one time was meant to replicate OpenStep, but is now dead, though that is not the case, but they need to let the world know they are alive. Also, they either need place nicer with the rest of the Linux/Unix desktops(Gnome or KDE) or either acknowledge that they are indeed their own little enviroment(the site still tries to pass it off as development libraries and tools)

  2. Re:gnustep by bsharitt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If they get serious about more complete source compatibility with Cocoa, it could go a long way to attracting Mac developers to Linux if they can accomplish ports of many Cocoa apps with simple recompiles.

  3. Alive by bartvh · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The previous news item in this category was exactly 4 years ago. He could start by sending out more 'press releases'.

    1. Re:Alive by borgheron · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This would be more the case, yes, thanks. :)

      GJC

      --
      Gregory Casamento
      ## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
  4. Ok I read TFA by Psychotria · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And... I think this dude is a complete moron. He types (on the page and in his blog) all this "business" speak gibberish which, in the end, means nothing. He says that he thinks KDE and Gnome are "amateurish" but doesn't bother to explain his reasoning behind the assertion. To me, this implies that he doesn't actually have a reason behind the assertion and that the whole silly blog is propaganda. I find his "business speak" patronising, transparent and meaningless. It may work for Microsoft, but propaganda does not work for the audience he is (supposed) to be targetting.

  5. The *big* problem with GNUStep... by muecksteiner · · Score: 5, Insightful

    was (and is), that few people realised how great the original NeXTStep environment - which GNUStep attempts to clone - was.

    I was already around as a CS major at the time NeXTStep basically failed in the marketplace due to a) asinine marketing/pricing on the part of NeXT Inc. and b) the fact that everytime we showed the NeXTStep environment to fellow CS students and CS faculty, you would mostly get blank stares, and a few polite remarks. But no more.

    Few "got it" how easy this was to use - concepts like the seperation of the user interface specification from the core logic of a program simply did not register with people weaned on TurboVision ("one line per code for each UI element"), and Apple has (probably rightfully so) more or less given up on educating people on how great the current successor to NeXTStep (Cocoa) is.

    Nowadays, people code for OS X because OS X is seen as a hip system with a small but viable installed base, and the fact that the dev tools are extremely nice is just an added bonus.

    So if GNUStep is just an Open Source version of something that is obsolete, why care at all?

    Well, because the likes of KDE could have had it so much easier if they had used something like GNUStep (the structure of which is pretty revolutionary), instead of toolkits like QT, which were developed to be just a "better Win32" API.

    Make no mistake, QT/KDE et al. turned out to *be* a better Win32/Foundation class environment, but I guess that most folks who were ever proficient in developing for the NeXT environment will agree, that a widely used and enhanced GNUStep would have been even more productive than that.

    And still could be someday - after all, Linux desktops are such a melting pot of different toolkits and environments, that perhaps some "killer GNUStep apps" (graphics apps, like an Illustrator clone would be a good start) could get people to notice GNUStep again.

    One can always dream... :-)

    Just my $0.2E-32

    A.

    1. Re:The *big* problem with GNUStep... by listen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Did you ever actually use Qt? It is not to be sniffed at.
      Its main disadvantage is the same one as all C++ toolkits : the vast majority of people programming are absolute beyond belief raving idiots and will destroy their lives very quickly when they are given as many avenues of complexity as C++ gives them. Of course, this will probably make them feel that they are experts. I've recently realised after working on a few Python projects in groups that the same sadly applies to dynamic languages : most people programming can not be trusted with anything more expressive than Java. They will happily screw that beyond hell as well, but Java tools are good enough to help you out of the mess, and any other languages tools are not. Lets not bring up the pitiful smalltalk refactoring tools that people who have never used them rave about. They were crap because they relied on type inference - and the code you really want to refactor is shit code, ie has no consistent typing. So, worse is better... sigh.

      Anyway, away from that semi-relevant rant, Qt itself is pretty well done and only things that I could see as real OpenStep advantages are scope related - it deals with a lot of interapplication stuff that Qt doesn't. I would really not dismiss Qt as an MFC++ or a Win32 wrapper - MFC is so foul it shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as any vaguely sane toolkit.

    2. Re:The *big* problem with GNUStep... by hey! · · Score: 2, Insightful

      is that the Java market place (maybe not through conscious design) is the only one where the central concept driving changes is that almost all people programming are utter dunces.


      Which is a stuck up way of saying that Java meets the needs of more projects than C++.


      Of course the best solution here is to stop employing muppets as programmers. This is certainly never going to happen in our lifetimes.


      One implementations of your best solution would be to hire, exclusively, graduates of the Vulcan Science Academy. Since your solution is predicated on assumptions contrary to fact, it is not in actuality a solution.

      While having more competent programmers would, in any world real or imagined, be a good thing, I think you also underestimate the problem of realism in project goals. Your goals and who you hire should be closely interrelated. If you aren't willing to hire people with the skills needed to complete your project with reasonable quality and the time alloted, your project's goals are not realistic.

      Hiring expensive talent and using a less "idiot-proof" language is not necessarily more virtuous than hiring median talent and using a more "idiot-proof" language. Nor are these the only two alternative strategies. The point is to have a strategy for a project that is sustainable, effective, and economical.
      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  6. Re:Please explain if you know... by m0llusk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    GNUstep is a GUI based on a toolkit and basic set of system services implemented using Objective-C. Because of the elegance of Objective-C, the design of the toolkit, and the architecture of the services, the experience of use is enhanced for ordinary usage and high level development and points in between. GNUstep emerged from the OPENSTEP standard.

    Much of Mac OS X Cocoa was derived from NeXTSTEP, so there is the possibility of some level of compatibility with Mac OS X. In some ways GNUstep might be considered superior because of simplicity resulting in the lack of integration with Carbon which was done on Mac OS X for partial compatibility with previous Mac OS versions.

  7. Where to begin? by Tony · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In 1985, Steve Jobs left Apple to found a new computer company. His company attracted many very talented individuals. They created the NeXT computer, a very advanced, very beautiful computer running a Unix-like operating system eventually called NeXTStep, which eventually became OSX.

    I use NeXTStep as proof that Microsoft has set the computer industry back 12 years. NeXTStep used display postscript on both the video display, and for printing. It was fully-preemptive, with a clean, POSIX-compliant system interface. The application framework was extremely advanced, and extremely easy to code for. Using Objective-C as the programming language of choice, NeXTStep had some very advanced programs for the time, such as Lotus Improv, the spreadsheet MS-Excel wishes to become when it grows up.

    As it is, MS-Windows still lags behind NeXTStep by a good amount, especially in terms of ease-of-development, ease-of-use, and aesthetics.

    Tim Berners-Lee created the World Wide Web on a NeXT.

    Anyway, when it became apparent that NeXT was not going to survive, they released a bunch of specifications that together made up the technical documentation for OpenStep, based on NeXTStep. The idea was that OS vendors could implement OpenStep APIs, and application vendors could target a single API for multiple OSs.

    GnuStep is an implementation of the OpenStep API, and other programs to recreate the NeXT environment on any Unix-like operating system. Applications written for GnuStep can be recompiled to target OS X with little-to-no work.

    Basically, when people say Linux needs an easy-to-use, easy-to-develop-for application environment and desktop, they are talking about GnuStep, whether they know it or not. It's not as flashy as GNOME or KDE, but it's much cleaner, easier to develop for, easier to use, and much more consistent. Where both GNOME and KDE try to be similar to MS-Windows, GnuStep tries to be like NeXTStep, the best application development and user desktop ever created.

    --
    Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
  8. Re:gnustep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Wow, you're very close to being one of those "older is better because it's older" people.

    - monolithic main menu bar w/ wasted blank space between the menus and the (optional) information / settings menus for Airport &c.

    By putting it there, it's faster to use. The blank space isn't so bad, since you couldn't put anything in a space that shape/position, anyway. Look at anybody using NeXT and see how much time they waste moving their menu around (not to mention acquisition time for the menu items in the first place, since they just float there).

    - verbose Mac-style shortcut descriptions w/ arcane symbols instead of concise NeXT-style shortcuts (in NeXTstep, Save is indicated by ``s'' and Save as by ``S'', no Command symbol (it's assumed---Control only as a modifier is reserved for personal shortcuts / Unix-use), Shift by case)

    Yeah, ^S is really verbose. (And sadly, Apple keyboards outside of the US have those symbols on the keys, but that's a hardware issue, not a software one.)

    - Print, Hide, Services and Quit are no longer top-level menus where they made more sense and were quicker to get at.

    I'm not sure what you mean by this. (Are you upset because you think it takes too long to quit a Mac app? How often do you do that?)

    - scroll bars on wrong side (this can't be fixed by theming 'cause Carbon apps are responsible for deciding where scroll bars are placed :( having them on the left means a window is more useful when partially dragged off-screen and results in less-frequent need to resize a window

    When you partially drag the window off the right, then left-side scrollbars are more useful. When you partially drag it off the left, then right-side scrollbars are more useful. Result: this is not a deciding factor.

    - no Webster.app (this has since been addressed w/ 10.4), Digital Librarian / Shakespeare or Oxford's Book of Quotations --- in NeXTstep this meant one was guaranteed to have Command = _not_ used in an app so it'd be available for looking things up in Websters

    As you point out, Mac OS X does have a dictionary service now. If I used it more than once a week, I might wish it had a keyboard shortcut, but I don't. (There's probably a trick to add one.)

    - Pantone colour library --- used to be this was licensed w/ the system, now each graphic app which needs it has to pay a license, and one _doesn't_ get them in one's office apps (major negative for adhering to corporate identity programs where such is specced)

    I guess this is a downside, but most people really don't care. Mac OS still handles color far better than Windows or Linux.

    - vertical menu

    This is an advantage ... ?

    - pop-up main menu --- this is wonderfully fast / efficient / elegant. For me, ``Punch'' in Altsys Virtuoso is pretty much a gesture, right-click, down a bit, then straight over and release

    The Mac has a "mile high" main menu. This has been shown to be faster than a context menu, *even when it's on a different screen* (see Tog on Interface).

    Then again, Mac developers always have the choice of using either one. If "Punch" is a common operation, developers are welcome to make it a popup menu, too. On NeXT, you can't make a mile-high menubar at all.

    - repositionable sub-menus --- no need for inscrutable button bars, and one can make a given command easy to get to as needed (when doing lots of envelopes I tear off the poste.app Services menu, put it in the bottom left corner, then an envelope is merely a selection, mouse move to bottom left, click, shift right to the print menu (also aligned on the bottom edge for this) click away. (takes longer to say / type than to do)

    I guess the Mac way is to use Applescript or Automator so you don't have to do the same mindless thing 1000 times by hand.

    Or right-click and choose "Icon & Text" -- then your toolbars are no

  9. Re:What GNUStep needs is... by Colin+Smith · · Score: 2, Insightful

    1: You can pretty much rip off a GUI as much as you like, nobody's won a court case to prevent competitors copying them.

    2: Take a lesson doesn't mean copy. If I wanted Aqua I'd just buy an Apple.

    However a great looking GUI along with a genuinely intuitive user interface, which is API compatible with an Apple Mac is a compelling proposition. In fact I reckon it has more potential than Gnome or KDE. The ability to write a GNUStep app and then just re-build on a Mac (and viceversa) vastly increases the market for both systems.

    --
    Deleted