[haiku] Re: New "BeOSCompatibility" package for Haiku
- From: "Luposian" <luposian@xxxxxxx>
- To: <haiku@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 17:50:45 -0700
I thought top posting was frowned upon... but since no one is saying anything
about it, I’ll throw in my $0.02, for the fun of it...
I find this whole debate/argument/discussion about “BeOSCompatibility” to be
utterly ridiculous. Why? Because BeOS is DEAD! Didn’t Be, Inc. die in 1999
or 2000? Who still develops for BeOS R5? Who still USES BeOS R5? Anyone?
Here we are, nigh 13 yrs. later and we’re trying to maintain compatibility with
an OS that is no longer being developed and no one is writing apps for or
using? Haiku is, to BeOS, in look and general function, but why hang this
albatross around it’s neck? Backwards compatibility has a certain amount of
value, but don’t stuff Haiku full of legacy support that is almost certainly
never going to be used. At some point, you HAVE to accept facts and move on.
I used to think BeOS R5 should be the ONLY dev platform for Haiku (I tend to be
a “purist” about things). But I was quickly cured of that insanity, when I
realized how utterly sluggish it was and how much better Ubuntu was! This is a
similar situation... we gave tribute to the legacy of BeOS, by creating
Haiku... but Haiku is so much more than BeOS ever was... it’s utterly
mind-boggling how much better it is! And now we wanna strap this
“BeOSCompatibility” layer/code/directory/whatever to it? W H Y ?!?
If BeOS was still being developed by Be, Inc. (or other entity) and Haiku was a
parallel clone, I could see the value... but BeOS is as dead and antiquated as
the Model T! I don’t want to be using 13 yr. old apps, for an OS that is dead,
if there is something better for Haiku. Besides, what does BeOS R5 even run on
nowadays... if ANYTHING? Last thing I ran BeOS R5 on was an AthlonXP 2000+
(and that, only with some type of function disabled in the BIOS). You couldn’t
PAY me to run BeOS R5 on anything... I’m ready to move on, with Haiku!
Why not just call it “BeOSAntiquity” and be done with it?
From: Jerry Babione
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 5:24 PM
To: haiku@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [haiku] Re: New "BeOSCompatibility" package for Haiku
I didn't say don't do package mgt. The "pkg" format is in question. If we use
the same format already established in BeOS then we are (1) unique, (2)
reliable with valid checksums. Otherwise it's still an unknown quantity. I'm
working with the new PKG mgr now and will have an opinion concerning it shortly.
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:08 PM, Jonas Sundström <jonas@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 21 okt 2013, at 15:26, Jerry Babione <jerry.babione@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> About a year ago, I became angry and ported gedit and then kate because
> I got tired ov waiting on the community to fix a acceptable word processor.
> Today, if it's not ABIWord, LibreOffice, OpenOffice, or what's KDE's suite
> Calligari it's not going to fly with consumers. That's the goal. That's
what
> has to be reached.
Package management is key to getting large apps like Open Office ported.
Without package management developers can't pool resources as
efficiently as with package management, and will be less able to take on
large projects.
The absence of high-profile ports is less of a reflection of the priorities
of the
Haiku project than a reflection of the size of the Haiku developer community.
IMHO,
Jonas Sundström.
--
Jerry Babione
Founder-Just Plain Folks Org. Inc.
Other related posts:
