[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Arx-users] Reasons not to switch to ArX
From: |
Walter Landry |
Subject: |
Re: [Arx-users] Reasons not to switch to ArX |
Date: |
Mon, 21 Mar 2005 23:46:18 -0500 (EST) |
Kevin Smith <address@hidden> wrote:
> At work, one of our projects is seriously considering switching to
> Subversion (from CVS). While I think svn is a worthy replacement for
> cvs, I don't see it as the ideal long-term option. This event has
> re-invigorated my interest in ArX, although I still have too many other
> vastly time-consuming projects going on right now to be able to
> contribute much to ArX.
>
> For them, ArX is missing:
>
> 1. Full MS Windows support. They use Linux, MS Windows, and Mac, so
> running on all three is absolutely mandatory. Any idea how far away we
> are from native (not cygwin) compatibility? I might even be able to
> sponsor a small amount of development on this.
There are two things that have to be replaced: the virtual filesystem
code (gvfs.hpp) and the process spawn code (Spawn.hpp). One option
that was not previously available is to use Qt. Since they recently
started offering Qt/Windows under the GPL, we can use that. However,
it doesn't look like plain Qt supports any secure protocol (sftp, ssh
or https). KDE supports it through kio-slaves, but I do not know how
hard it is to get those working in a pure Win32 environment.
I touched on some other networking options previously [1]. You would
also have to do something for the process spawn stuff. If you are a
half-decent Win32 programmer, it should be no big deal.
So, to answer your question, a few weeks work by the right people.
> 2. Some kind of GUI front end. A few users strongly dislike command-line
> tools, so a front end that allowed basic operations would probably be a
> "must have" feature (unless #3 below were available).
I don't know of any work being done on this. There are some tla
gui's, and it should not be too hard to modify them.
> 3. An eclipse plug-in. They could live without this, but if ArX had a
> good one, it would be a "killer feature" for many users. Especially if
> it were integrated with the refactoring tools so history would be
> preserved after a rename or move.
There has been some interest in this, but no work that I know of.
> Are there other features ArX doesn't yet have that would inspire more
> people and projects to switch to it? After the boost license is fixed,
> is there any reason not to do a major marketing campaign among Linux users?
I can't think of any.
Cheers,
Walter
[1] http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/arx-users/2003-11/msg00003.html
- [Arx-users] Reasons not to switch to ArX, Kevin Smith, 2005/03/21
- Re: [Arx-users] Reasons not to switch to ArX,
Walter Landry <=
- Re: [Arx-users] Reasons not to switch to ArX, amine . chadly, 2005/03/25
- Re: [Arx-users] Reasons not to switch to ArX, Kevin Smith, 2005/03/25
- [Arx-users] Proposal, amine . chadly, 2005/03/29
- Re: [Arx-users] Proposal, Walter Landry, 2005/03/29
- Re: [Arx-users] Proposal, Amine Chadly, 2005/03/30
- Re: [Arx-users] Proposal, Walter Landry, 2005/03/31
- [Arx-users] GUI front-end for ArX (was: Re: Proposal), Kevin Smith, 2005/03/30
- Re: [Arx-users] GUI front-end for ArX, Amine Chadly, 2005/03/30
- Re: [Arx-users] GUI front-end for ArX, Kevin Smith, 2005/03/30
- Re: [Arx-users] GUI front-end for ArX, Walter Landry, 2005/03/31