Board index » kylix » Re: Kylix for Mono or .NET???

Re: Kylix for Mono or .NET???


2004-06-02 03:35:30 AM
kylix0
Kevin wrote:
Quote
I guess you mean that it doesn't change the present situation: Kylix
needs updates right now to work on some distros etc.
Not just because of distros...it's minor problem since I've found that Kylix
works on any distro except distro version < supported.
You just have to put LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.4.0 into your startdelphi script.
Kylix really needs bug updates, qt3.XX wrapper, link against newer wine
libs.That's all ;)
 
 

Re:Re: Kylix for Mono or .NET???

Kevin < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
Quote
Ender wrote:
>>'Kylix is included in the 3 year outlook. Nothing I can announce as
>>yet. Danny Thorpe , 27.05.2004, 12:02pm '
>
>Nothing new. Same song.
Qt ( or even Realbasic 5.5) are likely to be more worthy contenders
than poor dead Kylix.
 

Re:Re: Kylix for Mono or .NET???

Kevin wrote:
Quote
Really, when did Borland say that they would continue Kylix development?
They not say that they "would continue development". AFAIU, most realistic
translation of Danny's phrase will look as: "In three years MAYBE we will
do SOMETHING with Kylix DEPENDING from some conditions. Currently we
neither have any plans about Kylix, nor do any actions toward Kylix
development."
Quote
Last I heard Kylix was receiving no updates in 2004- which sounded as
if Kylix was on hold indefinitely. Now we have something on the radar.
I guess you mean that it doesn't change the present situation: Kylix
needs updates right now to work on some distros etc.
It is only part of strategy. Customers wants Kylix updates and continued
development. They want to hear from Borland: "Yes, we have following plans
about Kylix <list of plans>. Yes, we allocated enough resources to make
these plans reality to <certain dates>". So Borland let to sink pieces of
information through non official channels to support customers optimistic
hopes. Those who had little problems with Kylix tend to have optimistic
vision. So smart! No one will be responsive if Borland change it's plans
because everything will be not official.
The real problem not in Kylix quality (it is young product and may have
bugs). The real problem in Borland's relation to Kylix and to Kylix's
developers.
P.S. In Russuia there is anekdote:
Optimist learn English. Pessimist learn Chinese. Realist learn AK
(Kalashnikov machine-gun). :-)
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: Kylix for Mono or .NET???

Ender < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
They not say that they "would continue development". AFAIU, most realistic
translation of Danny's phrase will look as: "In three years MAYBE we will
do SOMETHING with Kylix DEPENDING from some conditions. Currently we
neither have any plans about Kylix, nor do any actions toward Kylix
development."
Then you should read Danny's words again. He did not even
come close to saying that. He stated 'Kylix is included in
the 3 year outlook. Nothing I can announce as yet.' That
clkear indicates that it is in the three years, not that they
will wait three years and then decide. It has already been
placed on the raodmap for resources sometime in the next three
years. What exactly beyond that isn't said, but there was no
depending or any other items to indicate your paraphrase is
accurate. They do have plans, otherwise it would not be on
the 3 year internal plan.
 

Re:Re: Kylix for Mono or .NET???

"JED" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message news:< XXXX@XXXXX.COM >...
Quote
Bob Swart wrote:

>That sounds promising indeed. IBM also wants to give more focus on
>Linux, and I've been asked to write more articles about Kylix and DB2,
>which is the reason the last two (and next two) articles on
>www.drbob42.com/IBM will be using Kylix 3...

Hi Bob,

Just wondering what Linux distro and version you are using to run Kylix
3. I have been threatening to have a play with it for a while now, and
I might have some time available in the next week or so.

thanks,
JED
You may find useful to know that there are no problem with
Kylix 3 on Debian/GNU Linux ( both Woody and Unstable and with KDE from 2 to 3.2)
Have a good time,
Roberto
 

Re:Re: Kylix for Mono or .NET???

Quote
>They not say that they "would continue development". AFAIU, most realistic
>translation of Danny's phrase will look as: "In three years MAYBE we will
>do SOMETHING with Kylix DEPENDING from some conditions. Currently we
>neither have any plans about Kylix, nor do any actions toward Kylix
>development."
Jeff Overcash (TeamB) wrote:
Then you should read Danny's words again. He did not even
come close to saying that. He stated 'Kylix is included in
the 3 year outlook. Nothing I can announce as yet.' That
clkear indicates that it is in the three years, not that they
will wait three years and then decide. It has already been
placed on the roadmap for resources sometime in the next three
years.
Three years it is enough big amount of time to rethink everything. The
phrase about three year plans without any specific information sounds too
cloudly. Let's imagine they had line in the plan sheet:
- In 2005 decide what to do with Kylix.
Now they may say that kylix in the three year plans. Pure truth. It in the
plans. Doest it mean that development deffinitely will be continued? No.
Maybe this raise some interest in Kylix.
If they had following lines in the plan sheet:
- 2005 Q1 - Introduce fixes for K3. Close at least 90% of reports in QC -
Kylix.
...why don't say this to us? Even not officially.
Quote
What exactly beyond that isn't said, but there was no
depending or any other items to indicate your paraphrase is
accurate. They do have plans, otherwise it would not be on
the 3 year internal plan.
It is extremely easy to find some depencies. They found dependency between
amount of development resources and Kylix sales. Do this dependency
magically disappear?