Re: [RFC/make] Extend Framework support II

[Sheldon Gill]

On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:08, David Ayers wrote:
> Nicola Pero wrote:
> >>OK, so here's my second try :-)
> > Maybe we could change the default GNUSTEP_INSTALLATION_DIR on Apple to be
> > '/', and the default directory structure to match more closely the Apple
> > one (if there is a need), so that default installation procedures should
> > work well even for bundles and such.  That looks like a good idea to me.
> > Does it look like a good idea to you ?
>
> Agreed.

Definitely.  The default (apple-apple-apple) should be:
---------------------------------
# System paths
GNUSTEP_SYSTEM_ROOT  = /System
GNUSTEP_NETWORK_ROOT = /Network
GNUSTEP_LOCAL_ROOT  = /

# GNUstep preferences
USER_GNUSTEP_DEFAULTS = Preferences
USER_GNUSTEP_RC  =
---------------------------------

> > If you want it running and succesfull on apple-apple-apple, I think you
> > should switch your mind into apple-apple-apple mentality.

Absolutely. I advocate this stance for every platform.

This is why I think the defaults should be as above. It will let GNUstep fit 
in best with the OS.  Since it's (a-a-a) we're only using Additions.

It _should_ mean that frameworks and applications can be distributed as 
straightforward archives to be dropped into /Applications 
or /Library/Frameworks.  This is the apple way and so the way we should 
follow.

We also need to look at Xcode integration issues but that's a later step. 
Ultimately you should be able to untar a source archive, point Xcode at it 
and just go. I'm sure that Apple itself will help with that once we've got 
other things working well. It won't be too much work for them and will give 
them a slew of additional code. Win/win.

If a developer wants an independent GNUstep installation that is available but 
the build needs to be configured appropriately. I think this is the right 
approach as the majority of users, certainly those with fewer skills, will 
want a "match my system" default behaviour.

> > If you use gnu-gnu-gnu on Apple, that's a GNUstep installation, but it's
> > a completely different matter because it's not using the Apple framework
> > code.

Yes, and this is much more complicated.  First things first, we should have 
appropriate (read apple mentality) behaviour for apple-apple-apple and go 
from there. That's the thing the majority of Cocoa developers seem to want.

I'd be helping with apple-apple-apple if I actually had a MacOS-X box.
*Looks down at the Wallstreet he's typing on. Sigh*


Regards,
Sheldon