Updated Tcl Tk and Tix

[Charles Wilson]

Christopher Faylor wrote:

> Then he should no longer be confused.  In fact, I would have guessed
> that no one should have been confused after my initial response where I
> identified myself as the current tcltk maintainer.  But my guess would
> have been wrong.


I believe the confusion is now cleared up.  Any questions below are 
(obviously?) rhetorical.

the confusion was not about who maintains the current tcl/tk -- at least 
not after your initial response.  It was about the possibility of X 
support, how it could be integrated into the same package, or NOT 
integrated and released as a separate binary in a separate package 
(tk-x, etc).  And should discussions of cygwin packaging issues REALLY 
be discussed on insight's list?  Probably not.

Not everything is clearly "here" or "there", "black" or "white".  Some 
things are grey.  [Reiterate: but the cygwin-specific issues w.r.t 
packaging, maintaining, and X, have now been authoritatively answered in 
this thread.  The only thing left is bugfixes and testing of tcl/tk -- 
and that belongs over on the insight list]


> Why drag GNUpro into this?  We already have a tcltk package.  tk
> obviously already uses the windows GUI.  


Yep.

> I can't imagine a scenario
> where I would consider dropping support for that.  There are *obviously*
> people using it already.


Yes.  And the most important of those people, from the p.o.v. of Red 
Hat, who supports this entire cygwin project and provides the web space, 
mailing list, and honest-to-god paid developers, are the GNUpro 
customers.  I've got no beef with that.  It's a wonderful thing.  Where 
would we be without Cygnus's and now Red Hat's support?

>  Do we want the cygwin community to be able to
> run insight on Windows without an X server?  Of course we do.  Cheesh.


Absolutely true -- but personally I wouldn't mind having to crank up an 
Xserver to debug a program (unless, of course, I was trying to debug 
X... <g>).  Others probably have stronger feelings.  I'm not saying the 
we should replace the current tcl/tk packages with ones that only 
support X.  I'm agreeing that the status quo is and will remain the 
status quo -- and that's okay.  Besides, it's not really my decision 
anyway -- you're the maintainer.


>>NEW INFO from cgf (of which neither I nor Nicholas were aware): However, 
>>the cygwin support in that version of tcl/tk could be improved -- and 
>>development in that direction, for tcl/tk-8.3 is happening on the 
>>insight mailing list.  Gotcha.

> It depends on what you mean by "new info".  I've mentioned problems
> previously wrt gdb.  Maybe it was in cygwin-apps.  I don't remember.


I dunno.  I musta missed the *earlier* threads.  Sorry -- I've not been 
following the list super closely for the last few weeks...


> Then, I mentioned, in this very thread, that 8.3 was already available
> in the sources.redhat.com repository:
> 
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2002-06/msg00484.html


I did see that...but what wasn't clear to me was how those sources 
related to the "official 8.3" sources, or to the previous cygwin 8.0 
sources.  Was it merely a direct import of the official 8.3, or did you 
do a merge and 'up-port' the cygwin changes from 8.0 (a *massive* job, 
IIRC).  And what about Mumit's changes?  Why'd he post a version on his 
site -- with patches, presumably different than the "cygwin official" 
ones...confusing.

Yes, the "questions" raised in the previous paragraph HAVE been answered 
in this thread -- which wasn't the case when the thread first 
started...so there's no need for anyone to chime in with "answers" to 
the questions above.  Yippee for mailing list archives.

> Maybe you'd have a point about this "new info" if you were responding
> to my original message about the subject but, for some reason, you seem
> to have ignored that one.  Apparently it takes multiple attempts to get
> the point across.


New info in the sense that *I* didn't know about it before you posted it 
in *this* thread -- in your first response (not the second; the 
confusion I mentioned was not "current" confusion, it was "earlier" 
confusion.  Sorry that wasn't clear.  My bad.)


> (Hint for your next response:  "You never SAID that it was being handled
> in the insight mailing list!  You only mentioned that there were strange
> issues with tk and insight which were being tracked down."  I believe
> that is how these interchanges normally go.)


Nope, that part was clear -- from your first reply + the second one. 
You should know better than to expect the obvious from me -- I'll always 
come up with new and better ways to annoy you, Chris. <g>

 
> FWIW, I have no plans on releasing an X version of tcltk.  It's premature
> to consider it.


Ah, thanks for making that clear.  Since it's your opinion as the 
official maintainer, and the one person here with the best understanding 
of the codebase, that it is premature to consider an X version, then 
that's cool.


> 
> I suppose that the insight mailing list might be interested in seeing
> patches, however.


Everybody loves patches...

 
> I know that you are familiar with the mechanism for getting new packages
> into the distribution.  I can't imagine why I'd object to someone releasing
> X versions of tcl/tk libraries as long as they didn't interfere with the
> packages that are already part of cygwin.


righto.  It's that whole "do no harm" thing -- don't clobber other 
peoples packages.  So, *later* when it is no longer premature to 
consider an X version, then I suppose you wouldn't be annoyed if someone 
ELSE released and maintained a separate build of tcl/tk for X, even 
though the codebase for your package and his were the same.  It would 
just require a little coordination, probably...but you wouldn't feel 
like Nicholas or Mumit or whoever was stepping on your "turf".


> Whatever is offered should come from the same code base, however.


Right -- coordination is the name of the game.  But not until later, at 
least until well after the MSWinGUI version of tcl/tk for cygwin is "out".


> That's it for me.  If anyone wants to help with this, I'll see you over in
> the insight mailing list.  I'm sure that the people there will be very
> grateful to have people tracking down problems and will be willing to
> discuss problems with people who are serious about solving them.


Good deal.  See you there -- as much as I'm able.  End of thread.  I hope.

--Chuck



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/