Download Compiled Library option in downloads

[Van]

It would be nice to have the option to download the x.LIB, x.DLL and include files already compiled so people don't have to fuss about locating and downloading all the third party stuff compiling the library.

[CrazyEddie]

This is something that I really don't want to do for so many reasons; probably the only time it may happen is around the time of a 1.0.0 release, until then you're going to have to do your own compilation.

Locating and downloading the third party dependencies should not be too difficult; pre-compiled versions of these are available from downloads area of this site

CE.

[Van]

This replay is a IMHO reply - its not intended to insult anyone.

Whats the difference?

[IMHO]
I dispise having to fiddle-fart around downloading and compiling a damn library. Its such a waste of time. People spend more time "getting it compiled" than trying to "learn and use it". IF ITS A LIBRARY THEN MAKE IT ONE!

If you want MORE people to use your library, MAKE IT EASY FOR THEM.. This is just simple business smarts and common sense.

I am not saying do NOT offer the code. But most of use don't want to spend time "setting up" and compiling it.
[/IMHO]

[CrazyEddie]

DISCLAIMER: This is also not intended to offend...

I dispise having to fiddle-fart around downloading and compiling a damn library. Its such a waste of time.

If you're not happy with this situation, then prior to the 1.0.0 when I'll likely doing binary packages, you may provide pre-compiled versions for the good of the community. Do note though that you'll need to prepare and test at least six different versions for Win32.

People spend more time "getting it compiled" than trying to "learn and use it".

I can download the source release package and the dependency packages for any given config, change absolutely nothing, and have it compiled in under 10 minutes. If you think it's possible to learn this in less time than that, you're sadly mistaken

IF ITS A LIBRARY THEN MAKE IT ONE!

IT IS ALREADY LIBRARY. IT'S CURRENTLY PACKAGED AS SOURCE.

If you want MORE people to use your library, MAKE IT EASY FOR THEM.. This is just simple business smarts and common sense.

If somebody has tremendous trouble simply downloading and compiling the lib, then there's probably not much hope that they'll be able to do much with it afterwards; and to be brutally honest, I really don't need any more newbies on here who seem to have trouble just working thier compiler.

I am not saying do NOT offer the code. But most of use don't want to spend time "setting up" and compiling it.

The whole point of having code-only at the moment stems from the fact that in 90% of cases people are going to either want to, or need to, tweak the code anyway. So this is the best option, at least for the time being.

I'm not in any way opposed to doing binary releases, but it would be another thing taking my limited time; currently I am trying to get new features into the system, though I don't seem to have gotten anything done for weeks . Once things are a bit further along, the likelyhood of binary releases will increase.

[Spoke]

DISCLAIMER: This is also not intended to offend...

Well, I really want CrazyEddie coding new features, not testing compiled libs.

For my personal experience, took me less than 30 minutes to have everything compiled, and I just followed the instruction.

As an extra, we could release binaries for each mayor release, but keep updates/patches as source till we hit another release.

That way anyone can start from an stable version without to much troubles and grab the code when they feel more confortable with the system.

I´m currently doing so with our project, but of course we are only supporting VC 7.1.

As a side note, I would like to say that you MUST compile the library, otherwise how are you doing to help on debuging? or are you expecting the rest of us to fix it for you? How are you going to add new features, or help coding them?

Anyway since this is CrazyEddie´s GUI he decides how are things done, if you don´t like it you can always move to another place, just take into account that he is doing this for free and have no obligation with the rest of us.

And of course someone else can take the task of making the binary releases.

[spannerman]

Van wrote:

This replay is a IMHO reply - its not intended to insult anyone.

That is fair enough Van - people are entitled to their opinions, and you have not insulted anyone. However, your comments have instead revealed you're miss-understanding of what a free and open-source project is all about - otherwise what you have said is quite frankly very selfish.

Eddie does not have the time or inclination to do everything possible to make everything as simple and trouble free as you seem to expect. And you know what? He doesn't have to.

You see, people are just greatful that people like Eddie does what he does. He spends huge amounts of time in designing, developing and testing a rather powerful and feature-rich GUI library. We can then come along, take it away, and use it for whatever we like. No questions asked, no please or thank yous...we just grab it and take full advantage of its LGPL license. Eddie provides us with all the source code, examples and documentation, aswell as a web site and forum to constantly administrate. He is constantly improving and adding new features to the library. He even spends vast amounts of time listening to the public's feedback and implementing requests for them even if he never had any previous intention of doing so.

So what you are actually getting here is a pretty good deal. Regardless of what people may think of the end result, or whether they actually ever use it at all, the point is that you are showing a rather severe lack of appreciation.

Van wrote:

...But most of use don't want to spend time "setting up" and compiling it.

No, of course not. God forbid that we would actually have to do something ourselves. Then again, I wonder how much time we would have to spend "setting up", compiling and actually writing our own GUI library?

[CrazyEddie]

I always look at open source in a light where I think to myself "what can I give back?".

This does not always mean everyone should start making add-ons and submitting patches to every piece of OS software they use; I'll admit that I rarely do this, however, when I see something I do not like, nor do I start badgering the developers to make the changes I want!

I feel that even something as simple as bug-reports is giving back in it's own small way; if it's a bug that nobody else has reported, then it can (eventually) be fixed and everyone has benefitted.

Suggestions and the like are always welcomed by this project (if not others), though I do feel that once a reply has been given (as it was in this case), then it's time for the person making the suggestion to move on, rather than replying with a post that almost demands the implementation of a suggestion - ultimately this just annoys the devs and future posts are given a lower priority.

It's quite funny that in many cases where software has a paid license, you never hear from the majority of users; they pay their money and just get on with it. Yet in open source projects, people seem to be under the illusion that they suddenly have the right to demand things. Surely this should be the other way around?!

CE.