[CMake] Re: [Chicken-users] preferred gui library

[Brandon Van Every]

On 7/4/07, Alex Queiroz <asandroq at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/4/07, Brandon Van Every <bvanevery at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Felix was intoning "lightweight" back when we had that GUI discussion.
> >  As I said then, the problem with that approach is, everyone wants
> > different versions of "lightweight."  So by the time you get done
> > pleasing everybody, which is what needs to happen for projects to
> > become standardized, stable, well supported, and widely adopted, it's
> > not lightweight anymore.  At best it's middleweight and more typically
> > it becomes heavyweight.
> >
>
>      The problem is the "pleasing everybody" part. I've read that GUI
> thread and realised that a consensus was not achieved by the Elder
> Ones. My need for a GUI is urgent (I almost switched to PLT). So,
> instead of jumping into that endless discussion, I started hacking my
> own egg, which primarily address my needs. The IUP API is so small I
> had a working egg in a couple of days, and since I need just a few
> widgets besides an OpenGL canvas, it's perfect for me.
>      The project started with a selfish goal but, if anyone finds IUP,
> within its limitations, useful, I have nothing against sharing code
> and joining efforts.

Right.  Understood.  My point is, people can't cooperate on anything
when they fixate on "lightweight" as a design goal.  As you pointed
out, nobody reached consensus, and nobody got any meaningful work
done.  A related problem is the perception that ya gotta support
everything out there with infinite flexibility, that it's somehow
unacceptable to make a decision and stick people with the One True GUI
[TM].  Trying to cover everything means that nothing actually gets
done.


Cheers,
Brandon Van Every