Re: [Freeciv-Dev] fltk + civclient: anyone consider a port?

[David Pfitzner <dwp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Reinier Post <rp@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> An almost-finished patch I've done is for city build queue support.
> One reason I abandoned it is the fact that the client side has
> to be programmed twice: once for Xaw, once for GTK.  The clients
> are still very similar, so the actual coding doesn't take too much
> work, but GTK+ wasn't installed on my Solaris test machines until
> I did it last month, and I'm still not sure if it will run properly.

> It would be unreasonable to leave the GTK+ part of the patch to
> 'the GTK guy' or 'anybody who feels like doing it'.

I disagree.  I think that would be eminently reasonable.

Especially for patches which don't break the other client(s),
but just add a feature to one - those can go straight into cvs.
(Eg, the City Report "Change All" option was initially
only for Gtk+ client, went into cvs, and later someone did
an Xaw port.)

For structural changes which break other clients, its a bit
more complicated, but I still think its fine to post a patch
and ask for other people to do the other client(s).

-- David