Re: REQUEST: Name change for Anjuta 2

[Dave Camp <dave ximian com>]

I dunno, I think the confusion is a problem, and there was never enough
buy-in from the anjuta developers to really warrant using the same name.

Changing the name is a pain, though.

Anyway, I don't really have a say, given that I haven't touched any of
this for awhile :/

-dave

On Tue, 2003-07-01 at 03:20, Jeroen Zwartepoorte wrote:
> Hi John,
> 
> While i agree that a namechange might be good so people know the
> difference between the two projects, it requires quite a lot of changes
> to the source itself. And we've already done this once before going from
> gIDE to anjuta2. Calling it Gnome Development Studio (gds for short)
> sucks for a project name (ideally i'd like to call it "evolution"; that
> just fits so much better with a development tool than a groupware tool
> ;) )
> 
> What do other people think of this? Gustavo, Naba, Dave?
> 
> Jeroen
> 
> On Tue, 2003-07-01 at 05:33, John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
> > I don't know if Anjuta2 will ever become the focus of the core Anjuta
> > team now that Anjuta 1 for Gnome 2 has been gaining so much steam.  I
> > however have expressed my feelings that Anjuta 2 is great codebase that
> > not only builds on Gnome technologies but also has become a sort of
> > testbed on how those thechnologies should be used (Bonobo, user
> > configurable containers, good moduler design, etc.).  
> > 
> > I feel that despite some of the positives of Anjuta 2 it is being
> > over-shadowed by the more feature rich Anjuta project and not being able
> > to stand on its own merits.  Every time there is a new release of Anjuta
> > people get confused on what exactly is released.  Most people do not
> > look at version numbers except to see which one is bigger.  
> > 
> > I propose that Anjuta 2 be renamed to something like Gnome Development
> > Studio (though that may be a bit pretentious) and that it be refocused
> > into a development enviornment that makes working with Gnome
> > technologies easy (HIG, GObjects, Bonobo, GConf, etc.).  Anjuta itself
> > can continue on being the great general purpose IDE that it is.
> > 
> > As for those who hate to split and duplicate efforts I say that this
> > would not be the case.  Anjuta 2 features a moduler design that allows
> > its components to be reused by other programs (as in the case of
> > gtksourceview being used by gedit).  It is also my understanding that
> > Anjuta 1 can or will be able to use Anjuta 2 plugins at some point.  
> > 
> > Choice is good and while it was good intentions that led the Anjuta team
> > and gIDE team to join forces, reality stepped in and the two could never
> > realy be merged.  Now, I belive, it is time to part ways while
> > maintaining the similar goals of developing great development tools for
> > both Linux and Gnome. 
> > 
> > --
> > J5
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > gnome-devtools mailing list
> > gnome-devtools gnome org
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-devtools
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-devtools mailing list
> gnome-devtools gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-devtools