On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 05:07:03PM +0200, Stefan Schwandter wrote: > Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > > > Simply because gtk+ support is newer and still not finished. > > Then the solution is to improve it. > I am still hoping that gtk support will improve, but at the moment, it > doesn't seem that upstream wants to spend much time on it. Maybe he will > some time in the future, but not now.
Making everyone use the motif version is certainly not going to help to spur motivation to fix the Gtk+ version. > Well, but the author wrote the program, and he used the openmotif > library, and he says that his program works best with it. He provides an > alternative that doesn't work as good. Shouldn't our users be told > what's supposed to work better, namely the motif version? I don't see any logic in this, sorry. If he wrote a version that works on Windows as well, and even better there, should we tell people to use the Windows version? > > You gave him the wrong alternative. If he abandons the Gtk support, and snd > > is worth to be used on a free software system at all, other people will pick > > it up and fork development. > > It's good to think in long terms, too, but at the moment I think about > _now_. Now I think it wold be good to let users know the status quo of > the gtk version in the description of the package. > > The upstream README.Snd does state that the motif version's better > anyway. > Yes, isn't that enough to make you (pl.) happy? I mean, it's not as if the Gtk+ version is unusable. The differences, from what I read in the README, are minor and mostly aesthetic. Thanks, Marcus -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
