Re: SourceForge GWindows project

[Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@acm.org>]

I'm copying an email exchange between me and David Botton to
comp.lang.ada, because it involves significant issues for the
SourceForge GWindows project.

Unfortunately, it re-opens a discussion I thought was closed.

I apologize for not putting this on the list in the first place.

The original email from me to David is:

On Oct 16, 2004, at 8:48 AM, Stephen Leake wrote:

>> David,
>>
>> I started the SourceForge registration process, and it's more involved
>> than Savannah was. The application is reviewed by an actual human,
>> during normal business hours. So I think we need to have a good
>> project description.
>>
>> Since GWindows is taken as a SourceForge project name, we can use
>> GNAVI.
>>
>> From the GNAVI page:
>>
>>     The GNU Ada Visual Interface for Windows
>>
>> The license is GMGPL. But that's not on OSI's official list of
>> licenses. The GNADE project is using GMGPL, but is listed on
>> SourceForge as using GPL, so I don't think this will be an issue.
>>
>> For a description, how about:
>>
>>     GNAVI provides a programming framework for applications written in
>>     Ada for the Windows platform. It includes a thick binding to the
>>     Win32 API, a tool to generate bindings for COM objects, and a
>>     rapid application developement environment. GNAVI is intended to
>>     be a direct competitor to Visual Basic, Delphi, and similar tools.
>>
>> Should we start a fresh CVS tree, with the current releases of
>> GWindows and GNATCOM, or do you want to import your current CVS tree?
>> If we start fresh, we can rearrange directories, if you want to. I
>> have no problem with the current directory tree, except I'd add a
>> separate build directory. But we can do that later, after discussing
>> with the rest of the developers.
>>
>> later,
>>
>> -- 
>> -- Stephe

David Botton <david@botton.com> writes:

> I think we should start with a fresh tree with the next release I will
> be putting out this week.

I think it would be better to start with what people are currently
using. Then you can merge in your latest changes, and others can
merge in their changes.

Or import your current CVS repository, so the current release is still
available as a tag point.

> You should get on the GNAVI mail list (gnavi-list@gnavi.org) also as
> there has been much discussion as of late. 

It would make more sense for everyone to join the new SourceForge
list. The current GNAVI list should be discontinued. Remember, the
whole point of moving to SourceForge is to use better-maintained
servers for this project. As I understand it, your GNAVI list was down
for several months.

If the GNAVI list is archived somewhere, I can read the logs. Please
send me the URL for that; I don't see it on www.gnavi.org. 

If it's not archived, that's another reason for moving to SourceForge;
those lists are archived and browse-able.

> Before putting up the project we should get every one involved from
> there as well. 

Why "before"? We've been discussing this for weeks now on
comp.lang.ada, which was the only functioning forum at the time.

I suggest we create the SourceForge GNAVI project with the currently
released GWindows code, ask everyone interested to join that list, and
then start any discussions.

> We should also make sure to leave place for the GNAVI IDE as we are
> working towards organizing the project soon.

No problem.

> http://www.gnavi.org is set up as well. I'll send you a user name
> and password to update the site. 

I have no interest in helping to maintain that site; I'm only willing
to be a sysadmin and developer for SourceForge/GNAVI.

> I haven't played with SourceForge, but I assume we should be able to
> set up our "home" page as any domain we want.

I'm not sure what choices are possible for the SourceForge domain
names. GNADE uses "gnade.sourceforge.net"; maxima uses
"maxima.sourceforge.net".

Hmm. If you are saying that the web page hosted on the SourceForge
servers for SourceForge/GNAVI should be called "www.gnavi.org", ok; we
can do that if SourceForge supports it. But in that case, whatever
files you have currently under that domain should be moved to the
SourceForge server, where other developers in the GNAVI project will
have more reliable access to them.

> Also we may want to change: 
> 
>      The GNU Ada Visual Interface for Windows
>
> to
> 
>      GNAVI: The GNU Ada Visual Interface
> 
> The reason is that I already have the start of a port of GWindows to
> Mac OS X and plan on two more ports one to GTK and the other to  .NET
> Windows.Forms (the Mono project is porting Windows.Forms to Linux and
> OS X as well).

This is a total change in direction. The discussion on comp.lang.ada
made it clear that a "pure Windows" tool was desireable.

> The focus with out question though of GNAVI for now is though Win32.

We can't "focus for now" with a plan of "totally changing focus
later". A cross-platform design is _significantly_ different from a
single-platform design, from the ground up.

> So we should likely discuss this on the GNAVI list. 

By "GNAVI list", I hope you mean "the SourceForge/GNAVI" list. Until
the SourceForge list is set up, discussions should be on
comp.lang.ada, since that is where this issue (of setting up a home
for Gwindows) started.

> It may be the confuses is to focus on Win32 alone for GNAVI and the
> ports I am doing can be come some alternative path.

If you truly intend GNAVI to be cross-platform, we need another name
for the SourceForge GWindows/GNATCOM Win32 only project.

Hmm. "GNAW" has a certain odd appeal (Gnu Ada Windows).

"AWG" could work; Ada / Windows / Gnu. There are other projects on
SourceForge with "awg" in the name (DAWG, Dawgpaw).

"AWE" is even better; "Ada Windows Environment". That's the NY Stock
Exchange symbol for AT&T Wireless, but I don't think that's a problem.

Hey, how about "Visual Ada"? maybe not - people would think we _are_
Microsoft :).

Anyone have a better idea?

-- 
-- Stephe