Re: [Planner Dev] Hacking Planner / maintainership

[kriberg tihlde org]

> On the slow and bloated issue - having not looked for any, I'm wondering
> if there are any performance benchmarks or comparisons out there.
>
> I'd like to hear some more opinions on this - for or against.

I think using that mono has to many dependencies as an argument, is a
little bit silly. Planner is already dependent on a lot of dependencies,
which again are things I suspect most people already have installed if
they're using other gnome tools as evolution. The only difference in
dependencies, is that the mono stack has to be installed and the different
wrapper libs.

> One downside to moving to Mono would be that Red Hat would no longer
> include Planner with its distributions (since they won't or can't
> distribute Mono).  I'm most interested in using the best toolset for
> Planner, though.

I'm in favour of getting fresh developers and extending the feature list.
The thing I mostly miss in planner is better integration. Like planner
sending a calendar msg to a contact using evolution, so he or she gets a
note in their calendar of the deadline for a task.

Other features on my wanted list:
* When saving the project, a web page with the chart and tasks is updated
automatically
* A wizard for creating a new project. Asking you to select a database or
file (xml/gda-xml/sqlite) for storing the information. Allowing you to add
developers from a pool of earlier developers.


I would argue that mono has the same possibilities for integrating with
the desktop as C might have. There is support for the libraries planner
would need, like gda and evolution-data-server. Mono is also an easier
language to manage for fresh developers like college students, hence the
barrier to become a developer is lower than with C. How many
colleges/universities doesn't teach java/c# as primary language now? I've
been fighting with gtk the last two days for the database fixing and I
would enjoy a move to a more higher-level language.

--
Kristian Berg