Re: Standardizing the Windows build

[Eric McDonald <mcdonald@phy.cmich.edu>]

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:

> >From private discussion with Eric, it seems there is no standard,
> canonical build environment for Xconq on Windows.  There aren't even any
> regular Windows developers, apparently?  Xconq development is
> Linux-centric 

I told you that Hans develops on the Mac.

> I am willing to do the work of creating MS Visual Studio project files,
> if we can come to a consensus on what the standards should be.  A
> non-exhaustive list of issues:
> 
> - TCL distributions.  Eric thinks the TCL binary currently distributed
> with Cygwin is broken.  I'm not sure myself, 

Actually, I'm the one who isn't sure. What I am pretty sure about 
is that the Cygwin Tcl installation on _your_ system is broken. If 
your TCL_INCLUDE_SPEC points to a nonexistent directory, then 
something isn't right. (And if this argument is going to reach 
flamewar crescendo again, let's take it back off-list.)

> - Religion about commercial IDEs.  If most of you think MS Visual Studio
> is Evil, then we aren't going to get anywhere.  Most of us Windoze

It's not a matter of being evil. I simply would not want to say 
that I would want that to be the only approved, supported way to 
build Xconq under Windows. I think it can and should be an 
alternative though. And if you make it a viable alternative, I 
can't imagine anyone complaining.

> I'd better give you full disclosure on my various development agendas.
> That way you can make up your mind whether I'd be a welcome contributor
> or a downright menace.

It's hard to be a menace to GPL'd code unless you're stealing 
copyrights or violating the rather liberal terms of the license.

> Second disclosure: I'm interested in DirectX and .NET stuff.  Sure it's

Some DirectX optimization for the Windows Tcl/Tk and SDL apps 
might be desirable.

Eric