Posted by: Anonymous
[ip: 58.28.159.83]
on January 05, 2008 08:25 AM
This comment seems concerned about reinventing the wheel when so many existing tools (note the plural) fit most of the use cases.
I have been watching the GnuPDF mailing list for some time and have been impressed by how many of these authors of already existing tools have volunteered their time and code to the GnuPDF project. There are a lot of tools, but there are also a lot of gaps and redundancy. Amalgamating the libraries into one, very powerful library centralises development effort and fills all the gaps between the targeted projects that currently exist. It also leads to a project with a far-superior architecture http://gnupdf.org/Lib:Architecture that is rigorously tested at every stage http://gnupdf.org/Lib:Torture_Chamber
Like most Free software, the existing tools have largely grown out of people scratching an itch and filling gaps in existing libraries (gaps that a lot of comments here contend do not exist). The FSF, as always, takes a more professional, almost business-like approach to identifying goals and end results, organises resources and correctly prioritises development effort. The paid programmers do what is needed rather than what they feel like (thankfully these things often coincide) while still structuring development in a way that encourages and allows volunteers. The paid programmers ensure that the end goal is always getting closer and development will not stop once the library is 'good enough'. It will also, hopefully, create a more user-centric (users being, in this case, developers of PDF-related applications) library because the paid programmers can spend time on the often-ignored, less 'fun' aspects of programming like user-friendliness and documentation.
Hopefully the professional approach will encourage other programmers to join the development; snowballing the library into something that subsumes the functionality of the existing libraries. Then this comment-poster will get his wish: one, high-quality library that all developers can work on together. As soon as GnuPDF surpasses each library, I imagine that it will attract at least some of the developers of that library. That obviously increases the speed of development. To achieve that professional core of developers, working full-time on the necessary parts of the project, the FSF needs to raise funds; hence the appeal https://www.fsf.org/donate/directed-donations/gnupdf.html
With regard to a different comment, I heard a whisper that Qt is seriously considering GPLv3. It would certainly make life a lot easier if they at least made it 'GPLv2 or later' or added GPLv3 to their 'GPL Exceptions List'.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re: GNU PDF
Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 58.28.159.83] on January 05, 2008 08:25 AMI have been watching the GnuPDF mailing list for some time and have been impressed by how many of these authors of already existing tools have volunteered their time and code to the GnuPDF project. There are a lot of tools, but there are also a lot of gaps and redundancy. Amalgamating the libraries into one, very powerful library centralises development effort and fills all the gaps between the targeted projects that currently exist. It also leads to a project with a far-superior architecture http://gnupdf.org/Lib:Architecture that is rigorously tested at every stage http://gnupdf.org/Lib:Torture_Chamber
Like most Free software, the existing tools have largely grown out of people scratching an itch and filling gaps in existing libraries (gaps that a lot of comments here contend do not exist). The FSF, as always, takes a more professional, almost business-like approach to identifying goals and end results, organises resources and correctly prioritises development effort. The paid programmers do what is needed rather than what they feel like (thankfully these things often coincide) while still structuring development in a way that encourages and allows volunteers. The paid programmers ensure that the end goal is always getting closer and development will not stop once the library is 'good enough'. It will also, hopefully, create a more user-centric (users being, in this case, developers of PDF-related applications) library because the paid programmers can spend time on the often-ignored, less 'fun' aspects of programming like user-friendliness and documentation.
Hopefully the professional approach will encourage other programmers to join the development; snowballing the library into something that subsumes the functionality of the existing libraries. Then this comment-poster will get his wish: one, high-quality library that all developers can work on together. As soon as GnuPDF surpasses each library, I imagine that it will attract at least some of the developers of that library. That obviously increases the speed of development. To achieve that professional core of developers, working full-time on the necessary parts of the project, the FSF needs to raise funds; hence the appeal https://www.fsf.org/donate/directed-donations/gnupdf.html
With regard to a different comment, I heard a whisper that Qt is seriously considering GPLv3. It would certainly make life a lot easier if they at least made it 'GPLv2 or later' or added GPLv3 to their 'GPL Exceptions List'.
#