Re: [gtk-list] Re: Windows NT port of GTK+

[Shevek <shevek plaice valhalla net>]

It's all very well saying that you will port to an MS environment, but
since when have MS environments been totally comlpiant with anything?
Stick to the GPL, as soon as you start messing with VC++ you end up with a
whole new problem of what is going to happen to VC++ in the future. A lot
of people, in fact the great majority of people I know and work with
prefer to use GPL software even if they have to use windoze, and would not
use VC++. Make it compile under VC++ is all very well, but don't make it
rely on it.

--
S.
GM/CS/MU -d+ H+>++ s+: !g p2 au0 !a w+++ v-(---) C++++$ UL++++$ UB+
US++ UI+++$ P+>++++ L++++$ 3+ E--- N+ K !W(-----) M+(-) !V -po+ Y+ t+
5++ !j !R G' !tv b+++ D++ B--- e+ u+* h++ f? r-- n---- y?


On Fri, 1 May 1998, Matt Kimball wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 09:36:31PM -0700, fractture wrote:
> > I definately think if your going to port GTK+ it needs to be to a
> > Gnuized library environment+compiler like djgpp or gnu-win32!!  We
> > want to make porting easier, not do advertizing for some MS product.
> > I am all for it as long as it doesn't rely on comercial products,
> > especially MS's stuff.  If someone wants to make VC++ development
> > easier, that could be done later,...but the first port should
> > absolutely be to a free environment.
> 
> This is pretty much how I feel as well.  I just wondered if others
> felt differently.  (In my experience, the Microsoft tools *are* easier
> to use when developing for Win32.  But freedom gained by using GPLed
> tools outweigh any ease of development gained by using VC++).
> 
> -- 
> Matt Kimball
> mkimball@xmission.com
> 
> -- 
> To unsubscribe: mail -s unsubscribe gtk-list-request@redhat.com < /dev/null
>