[Gambas-user] Pre-release of Gambas 3.5.1

[Tobias Boege]

On Fri, 15 Nov 2013, PICCORO McKAY Lenz wrote:
> From: Tobias Boege <taboege at ...626...>
> > Yeah... Let's don't get political here.
> >
> 
> > PS: I'm away over the weekend. I realise that I presented my views in a
> > rather destructive manner and as if they were facts - on purpose. If this
> > thread becomes a flame war about software development philosophies,
> > sophists
> > and globalisation I just want to say: he started it :-) And in case it
> > matters: I use vim, not emacs ;-)
> 
> dont worry, its just u'r opinion..
> 
> but logic said: it when something works and just "the environment"
> force to upgrade/change, this being illogical,
> if something works it is illogical to change for something that
> has not been tested yet! RIGHT?
> 

Totally right. But you talk about your system. If you apply this statement
to Gambas, you say that we should stop making new components or adding new
features to existing ones. This is possible but some people out there want
new features - and, as I said, things would get boring around Gambas if we
didn't do new things with new libraries or newer versions of libraries.

> 
> > (I don't want to sound like a sophist but I have to note this:)
> > English is not my native language but at least the normally used German
> > word
> > for "development" means something around progress, kind of evolution. If
> > you
> > don't want new packages to be used, then you effectively say that Gambas
> > should not be developed anymore by software developers but just maintained
> > by some bookkeeper. Then you will soon find people leaving the project. It
> > would just not be interesting anymore. (Well, at least then, Gambas would
> > be
> > truly stable.)
> well develoment its about progress, of course, today this meaning was
> "misrepresented/twisted" in very convenient terms je!
> i cited, its about progres TO A FINAL POINT!
> not to a constant undefined no-end "upgrading way of things"

Well, I'm a child of "today" and I grew up with this "undefined upgrading"
mentality, apparently. BTW, what would that "final point" be so we can work
straight towards it? (I'm currently, as university leaves time left, working
on a gb.inotify component. But I think this is OK since it doesn't need any
library.)

> 
> > Of course I see that you mean two different things when you say "new" on
> > the one hand and "new" on the other hand but you should make it clear
> > to not get misunderstood.
> >
> > Maybe what you want is something like this: have someone maintain an old
> > stable release of Gambas and just patch in bug fixes (like the Linux kernel
> > does) to these releases. You can even have someone to only patch in bug
> > fixes and interpreter enhancements and leaving alone gb.media at
> > gstreamer-0.10. Why not?
> >
> > I tell you why not: you need people who volunteer (or someone who
> > volunteers
> > to hire someone ;-)) and there currently is nobody to do it. Will you?
> i doit that, my gambas packages has backported 12 patcheds from 3.5.X release
> 
> u'r opinion its a interesting point! of course
> 
> >
> > "There's an old saying: Don't change anything... ever!" -- Mr. Monk
> >
> yeah ..    ??_??u
> 

In the end, man is a pragmatist, isn't he? :-) You know, Mr. Monk changed
lots of things to please some higher need (to make things rectangular, for
example). :-)

I don't know how such things work with SVN but I'm sure you can have your
own branch of Gambas on sourceforge to make your "only bugfixes" Gambas
accessible to everyone else who doesn't want to depend on bleeding-edge new
libraries. In the end it's you who decides what Gambas your computer runs.

Regards,
Tobi