Hi!
Alexis:
C::B guys obviously are the masters and manage the project as they please !
Of course.
On the other side, C::B has a particular aspect: it is a basic brick of software development (as frameworks are). So its development has an influence over many software. That is the reason why I consider its design should be more 'shared'.
I thank guys who created C::B and its plugins, but at some point this software become more than just one project like many, it is now (potentially) a crucial tool for our profession (developers), and our profession is for certain the basis of all software aspects of computers.
In other words, this kind of tool is strategic and has an impact on all computer world.
So , at a minimum, voice of users should be quite important in the design decisions of this kind of tool.
It would deserves a public survey, something more organized and large than just a forum.
I believe we need not only developers for that project, but coordinators, and an effort to build a different web site, allowing more communication and more 'democratic' decisions.
There is room for individual enterprise
and group decisions (or coordinated work).
a all-in-one setup has an advantage: it could allow to set all the relevant paths (toolchain, help... see below) and also to make sure all components work well together (toolchain, C::B, wxWidgets)
Yes, that's true.
Maybe there is a way to integrate the two possibilities through one technical solution (in order to avoid doing the job twice).
For example, a little update and plugin manager could be used at the end of (or during) installation, and at will later.
Go in menu Settings>Environment, browse icons and select the "Help files" icon
Thank you!
I'm not sure CB team completely agrees with this statement (see above). I'm not sure, that practically it always happens like this in FOSS projects in general
No troll inside
That world is not perfect. But we can help it.
I remark that two major free open-source soft, FireFox and OpenOffice, become more important each day, and have a very unusual development structure (based on old commercial software, lead by companies organising volunteers). See also Mono.
As anybody, I watch these two aspects (lead by companies, and attractive projects), with many thoughts.
Are the independent projects able to be organized as well as these projects ? That is a major question, especially for essential tools (essential to our professional future).
if you think something should be done, then develop it yourself !
I have no time to do it myself (time is THE problem !)
Precisely!
Another aspect, which take much time, is the complexity of projects and their failure of documentation.
Currently, it is difficult to understand large open-source projects, essentially because we, programmers, all know it is easier and much quicker producing code than creating documentation.
My dream is to see, one day, a project with a clear, reliable and updated diagram of its structure. A precise and short explanation on the main technical decisions (programming languages, framework) and relations between modules.
Currently, most project only have an automatic extraction of the header sources, and sometime a short documentation for end users.
If projects would be clearer, well documented, openly discussed by all the communities of programmers and users, clearly they would be more integrated, efficient and supported.
I am interested in ideas about tools and technicals to help organizing open-source community and projects.
I started developing a plugin named codepacks to solve library problems since it was going to work like synaptic downloading libraries from repositories
Bravo!