Re: [wxCode-users] wxCode project improvements

[John L. <jla...@gm...>]

On 7/22/05, Francesco Montorsi <f18...@ya...> wrote:
>  >> I've just added the UNMANTAINED search option in the website search
> page.
>  >> So it's now easier for wxCode administrator to find the unmantained
>  >> components (actually there are 15 of them ! half of the registered
>  >> components; shouldn't we do a cleanup ??)
>  >
>  > I don't know what you mean by cleanup, just because a project hasn't
>  > been tinkered with recently doesn't mean that it doesn't work as
>  > advertised.
>=20
> Almost all (and I say "almost" only because I haven't tried them all
> yet) do not provide any working build system so that it's impossible to
> compile them to test if they work without writing a new bakefile/makefile=
.
> Looking at the dates in the source files and in the readmes I find that
> most of these components have been created for wx2.0 or wx2.2 and I
> really doubt that they could still compile and work for wx2.6 without
> some work on them.

You're right... after checking again, there are a few that are in
rough shape. I don't know what's the best way to handle them. I'd say
just leave them for now.

>  > I was actually thinking that we should tone down the
>  > UNMAINTAINED banner since it'll only discourage people.
>=20
> maybe it does but I think that anyone who needs a component wants
> something reliable or at least working; and actually unmaintained
> components are not reliable nor "compilable"...

I completely agree, in order to wxCode to be successful, the
components have to work, otherwise people won't bother. However, each
component does say if it has a build system and sample, which should
be a good indication of it's "status".

> It's a pity remove code that could still be useful with some
> modifications... maybe we should add some links (something like "Want to
> be the maintainer for this component ?") in the complist which are shown
> in each unmaintained component and which point to the register page;
> maybe in this way we could find some mantainer for reworking of current
> components...

That sounds like a good idea.=20

> if you find some unmaintaned components which you can get to work, then
> please report it... maybe I should write a simple bakefile, maybe just
> for win32 compilers (which I can test easier than GCC) to add to the
> more promising unmaintaned components...

I won't have any time to do anything before the fall. I suppose it
wouldn't be too hard to whip up bakefiles and at least try to compile
them, noting the result in the component list and of course adding the
bakefiles, makefiles, and project files to the cvs for others. If you
have time that'd be great.

Regards,
    John Labenski