Re: Is ObjC++ still in time for 4.0?

[Gregory John Casamento <greg_casamento@yahoo.com>]

--- Helge Hess <helge.hess@opengroupware.org> wrote:

> On 19. Nov 2004, at 01:37 Uhr, Ziemowit Laski wrote:
> >> Zem is asking me to design his frontend's data structures for him.  I
> >> don't have time to do that right now, and Zem hasn't done the design
> >> work himself, so we're waiting.
> > Since Geoff has objected to every design proposal I made, then 
> > naturally
> > I was (and am) expecting a constructive alternative.
> 
> So the situation seems to be that you have proposed designs which were 
> rejected by Geoff, probably because they were either considered 
> incomplete or unacceptable.
> Obviously you can't expect an alternative from him (does he work for 
> you or Apple?), as he mentions he has the time to review stuff for 
> inclusion but not to propose designs.

It's silly to expect someone to constantly come up with designs without giving
you a clue as to what is and is not acceptable.   Given that Geoff is on the
list and is obviously working on gcc, it stands to reason that if he has a
problem with a particular implementation, the least he could do is *articulate*
the reason for the objection.

It's like objecting to a marriage and walking out without giving a reason why. 
You've put the kibosh on something, NOW you have to pay the price and explain
yourself, it's really just as simple as that.

> The question for me is how we can resolve the situation to get forward. 
> Is there any other GCC maintainer besides Geoff who has the authority 
> to review your proposals for inclusion and to mediate between you two?
> In case a theoretical "other" also rejects your proposals, can we find 
> someone who can come up constructive alternatives people can agree on?

Barring any input from Geoff regarding what he thinks is acceptable and also
barring any constructive alternative presented by him, it seems reasonable for
Zem to continue what he's doing as it's silly for him to sit and wait for
feedback which Geoff is unwilling/unable to give.

> Or maybe Apple can consult (aka pay) Geoff to come up with a 
> "constructive alternative"?

Seems like the worst way to go.   Additionally, you're assuming that objecting
somehow implies superior skill.

> It would be disappointing if the work on ObjC++ would fail even though 
> there is someone willing to work on the implementation. We are waiting 
> _so long_ for that feature ...

Indeed.

> best regards,
>    Helge
> -- 
> http://docs.opengroupware.org/Members/helge/
> OpenGroupware.org

Later, GJC

=====
Gregory John Casamento 
-- CEO/President Open Logic Corp. (A Maryland Corporation)
#### Maintainer of Gorm for GNUstep.