Ramblings and questions regarding Fedora, but stemming from gnome-software and desktop environments

Hedayat Vatankhah hedayat.fwd at gmail.com
Sat Jan 3 19:26:47 UTC 2015



/*Luya Tshimbalanga*/ wrote on Fri, 02 Jan 2015 17:29:14 -0800:
> On 02/01/15 01:15 PM, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
>>
>>
>> Probably true, but it already includes fonts and input sources. So, 
>> someone has felt that 'front-end applications only' is too narrow. 
>> Now, where you can draw the line?
>>
> I exaggerated.
>> Did you try that? The problem with searching for "C++" is that it 
>> will list almost all applications (probably it searches for "C"). So 
>> it has nothing to do with DevAssistant.
> I just searched "C++" resulting a freeze of Gnome Software due to 
> handling of "++" character. That is a bug I already submitted 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1178199
> Normally, Gnome Software should list DevAssistant on the first list as 
> I have no problem typing python or ruby keyword on the search field.
Thanks for filling the bug. :P I was thinking when I'll report it.


>>
>> So, every IDE should have a 'clang' addon? and also a gcc addon? At 
>> least, if 'shared' add-ons are available things will be much easier.
> In this case, why not?
I was actually suggesting a solution which could fit in the current 
design. I'm not against the latter (while I still prefer having them as 
independent applications, in case you really don't need an IDE. However, 
if it is also available as a DevAssistent add-on, it'd be good; but 
actually I'm mis-using DevAssistant as 'Development Tools' category!)


>>
>> I wonder why people want to split developers into two categories: 
>> GUI-only and Terminal-only? Why there couldn't be a "GUI as much as 
>> possible developer"? Such a developer will prefer to install 
>> autotools and clang/gcc using a GUI application, then open a terminal 
>> and run "./configure && make && sudo make install" in shell? Why do 
>> people think that a developer which wants (actually, since currently 
>> there are no(?) GUI ways to do configure, make and make install, he 
>> is forced) to use terminal should be 'punished' to use command line 
>> for installing the tools he need?
> They were attempt of create a frontend for that purpose and most of 
> them were poorly implemented. Take a look of how Microsoft and Apple 
> do their development. it is a matter of finding a better way of 
> implementing the tool.
If you mean finding a replacement for autotools, I disagree. While 
having better ways is great (and actually, there are many 'autotools 
replacements' and some of them are GUI friendly. A good example is 
CMake), but there is a fact that there are many packages using autotools.
I don't know how Apple does it (but I think I remember some of my 
friends actually being *forced* to use command line to install an 
auto-tools based library), but I wonder if you know about a 'better way' 
Microsoft provides. As far as I know, installing and using third-party 
development libraries under Windows is nearly Terrible. And, the last 
time I tried to use Boost under Windows it certainly needed using 
command line to use boost build system. I used several other libraries 
under Windows, none of them provided any *good* means for installation 
and usage. Most importantly, Windows doesn't (or at least, didn't!) have 
any Software Center like tools at all. So, there are no means in Windows 
for finding and installing development libraries; and hence it can't be 
better or worse than ours!


>>
>> (Well, hopefully in future there will be a tool (DevAssistant?) which 
>> can help you to configure, compile and install a package from source. 
>> Then, it can have gcc/clang/... compilers as its addons too; so it's 
>> become more practical to have GUI-only developers who don't need to 
>> install a compiler directly).
>>
> DevAssistant is a start. Next step will be adding packaging guideline 
> and other stuff. It takes time but it can be done.
>
>>>
>> Add-ons cannot cover development libraries, unless every library is 
>> an add-on for all IDEs!
> Then is IDE packaging issue. When it comes of using a development 
> applications, the software should suggest installing the missing 
> library. If Gnome Video is able to prompt uses to install missing 
> component, then why shouldn't be possible for IDE application to do 
> the same?
> Granted I don't know well the functionality but the logic is 
> application should detect and suggest adding the missing function.
Hmm... that's weird, I can't understand what you mean. Gnome Video's job 
is very easy: a video has a special format, and there are specific 
plugins to enable playing that. However, assume that I need an XML 
library for C++:
1. How can I tell the IDE that I need an XML library?
2. What should IDE do if there are 5 different XML libraries for C++? 
How should I tell it which one I want, specially if I don't know what 
should I use already, and want to see what is available out there?

To me, it seems like implementing a special purpose software manager 
inside IDE with almost all functionality GNOME Software provides. As I 
said in another post, user reviews/rating for development libraries 
(like what GNOME Software provides for applications) can be really 
helpful when a developer wants to choose a library for a specific purpose.

Regards,
Hedayat


>
> -- 
> Luya Tshimbalanga
> Graphic & Web Designer
> E:luya at fedoraproject.org
> W:http://www.coolest-storm.net
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20150103/4a20c6a8/attachment.html>


More information about the devel mailing list