From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,fb89149bff45fa40 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!proxad.net!newsfeed.stueberl.de!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!feed.news.schlund.de!schlund.de!news.online.de!not-for-mail From: Frank Piron Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: gwindows as target from rapid Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 08:41:56 +0200 Organization: 1&1 Internet AG Message-ID: References: <116a1020.0409021406.64897ff7@posting.google.com> <116a1020.0409071310.5bdd9b7@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: p508b4cf4.dip0.t-ipconnect.de Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: online.de 1094625462 8396 80.139.76.244 (8 Sep 2004 06:37:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@einsundeins.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 06:37:42 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Opera7.23/Win32 M2 build 3227 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3461 Date: 2004-09-08T08:41:56+02:00 List-Id: Am 7 Sep 2004 14:10:05 -0700 schrieb Stephen McNeill : > Fionn mac Cuimhaill wrote in message > news:... >> On 2 Sep 2004 15:06:31 -0700, mcneills@landcareresearch.co.nz (Stephen >> McNeill) wrote: >> >> >Some time ago there was some brief discussion about the future >> >direction of Gwindows. Nothing came of that, so I wanted to know if >> >Gwindows is something people are still interested in, or should we give >> >it a decent burial? If it is still needed, perhaps we need to organise >> >ourselves to be able to get the package to a state we're happy with. >> > >> >Regards >> >Stephen >> >> I'm using it, and am planning on adding substantial extensions to the >> printing support, as well as to other parts of GWindows. > > Great. I also have some modifications planned. It seems then, from > your comments, and those of Frank Piron, that there are a few > more-or-less parallel efforts to move Gwindows along, albeit in > different ways. > > So, is there some consensus for a formal structure to maintain the > package, or would people prefer to do their own thing? Oh, and a reply > doesn't necessarily constitute an offer to manage the effort... Perhaps it would be helpful if we first could get a simple table: is working on of GWindows --------------------------------------------------------- Fionn mac Cuimhaill printing ... ... KonAd controls ... ... to avoid redundancies. -- Crisis? What Crisis? ---------------------------------------------------- f_r_a_n_k_a_t_k_o_n_a_d_d_o_t_n_e_t