Re: Native windows support (was Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Extension language)

[Karel Gardas]

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003, Tom Lord wrote:

>
>
>     > From: Joshua Haberman <address@hidden>
>
>     > I would argue that a native Windows port is highly desirable right now,
>     > and that any version control software that seeks to become pervasive
>     > will need to run on plain Windows.  The cross-platform projects I work
>     > on could never move to a version control system that didn't support
>     > Windows because it would isolate the contributors that use
>     > Windows.
>
>
> What you describe is a shop with these characteristics:
>
>       *) some programmers working on unix-family platforms
>         *) some programmers working on msft-line platforms
>         *) a shared line of development between the two
>
> Developers specializing in work on msft platforms are likely to be
> already trained and ready to go using msft platform vc tools, horrid
> though those tools may be.
>
> Supposing that the unix developers would like to work with arch, then
> the shop you describe has a problem to solve:  how to bridge between,
> say, "visual source [un]safe" and arch.

But why? I'm thinking about free software here. Imagine just developers of
MICO (http://www.mico.org) who need to develop on Win32/Unix/Unix-like
OSes and they for example don't need to have full M$ devel solution, but
cygwin and/or mingw might be ok for them.

If MICO is too small project for you, then imagine GCC project. Certainly
there are core developers taking care about both Cygwin and MinGW ports
who really need to work on Win32 OSes while accessing future GCC Arch
archive(s). IMHO for them not having Win32 stable Arch port is showstopper
-- as the same is for our (MICO) Win32 developers.

So IMHO Win32 Arch port is really needed.

Cheers,

Karel
--
Karel Gardas                  address@hidden
ObjectSecurity Ltd.           http://www.objectsecurity.com