Re: Privatizing 'linc' ...
- From: Greg Edwards <greg nas-inet com>
- To: orbit-list gnome org
- Cc: Ross Golder <ross golder org>
- Subject: Re: Privatizing 'linc' ...
- Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 15:35:41 -0500
Ross Golder wrote:
> On ศ., 2003-05-23 at 19:45, Greg Edwards wrote:
>>I would ask you to NOT make ORBit2 any more dependent on GNOME than it
>>already is. Using an API to connect GNOME to ORBit2 (as it appears
>>you've done with libbonobo) is, IMO, a much better way of getting from
>>here to there.
> Except for glib, neither ORBit nor linc require any of the GNOME
> Unless I'm missing the point, we're just discussing the pros and cons of
> merging the linc codebase up into ORBit.
> We lobbied hard for the use of existing API in gnopernicus, for its
> I/O, and I think we still need such an API. I don't think ORBit2 is
> the place for such an API, and I'm not sure what alternative GNOME
> APIs should be used instead. Certainly not ORBit API for the braille
> stuff. What would you recommend instead, something in g_iochannel?
> - Bill
This was the post that made me a bit nervous ;)
Up to now I've been very happy and impressed with the ORBit2 package.
I'd really like to tip my hat to the team for their work. Someday down
the road, when I've got the time, I'd like to offer my assistance, if
the team is interested. This is a package that I'd like to give back
too when I can.
This project has me working 12-14 hours a day, 6 days a week, and I've
put allot of stock in ORBit2 as our distributed IPC service. Having it
available has saved me months of development effort. So any hint of it
changing from an environment independent tool gets my attention real
fast ;) As long as it's libraries, APIs, Linux, and C, I'm happy :)
If I over reacted or misread the direction of the discussion, I apologize.
Again, thanks big time to the team that spent their late nights doing
New Age Software, Inc. - http://www.nas-inet.com
Galactic Outlaw - http://goutlaw.nas-inet.com
The ultimate cyberspace adventure!
] [Thread Prev