Re: Informal poll

On Wed, Apr 16, 2003 at 09:45:31AM +0200, Peter Graf wrote:
> Micah Dowty wrote:
> 
> > 1. Fixing bugs
> 
> I would simply vote for that, if I wasn't waiting for the overlapping
> windows option (Please don't shoot :-)

Well, there are two ways picogui could do overlapping windows...

- Using a separate compositing engine. This is what the x11 rootless
   mode does. The same technique could be used alongside DirectFB

- Implement my "S2 engine" idea. This would mean a considerable video
  code rewrite if done in pg1, so it's being delayed for pg2.


> 
> > 2. Adding features
> > 3. Replacing picogui's build system
> > 4. Working on the new pg2 architecture
> 
> I perfectly understand that you can't maintain both pg1 and pg2. Since
> you have already put considerable efforts ito pg2, I'd say go ahead with
> pg2 and don't divide your efforts.

Actually, there's very little code in pg2 so far. Only design work has
been done on it so far. We're planning on getting a stable release of
pg1 out first, before concentrating on pg2. There's more about this on
the wiki.

> 
> > 5. Other?
> 
> Just the (hopefully unnecessary) plea to keep in mind that a major strength
> of pg is it's potential good portability to non-Linux embedded targets. Some
> of those targets only offer a C-Compiler and limited POSIX compatibility.
> Don't leave this market sector to NanoX!

Definitely. I'd love to get PicoGUI working on eCos, OSKit, NetBSD, L4... the
main problem currently is that the build system is quite baroque.

--Micah

-- 
"For every problem, there is a solution that is simple, elegant, and wrong."
           -- H.L. Mencken


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf