tom@ICASE.EDU (Tom Crockett) (06/06/89)
Due to the level of demand I see on this mailing list, I think it's time the X Consortium should seriously consider including a top-quality PostScript previewer in the core distribution. I've tried both xps and ghostscript, and neither of them is as robust or portable as one would like. (I'm currently using xps, but it's slow, and definitely not robust, although certainly better than nothing.) How about it guys? Maybe Adobe would like to contribute one as a public service? These are strictly my personal opinions.
rws@EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU (06/06/89)
The X Consortium is not the Free Software Foundation*; our goal is not to
produce free software. Our software distribution is in some sense a
side-effect of what we do, rather than the objective. Producing specific
applications to meet market demand has never been a goal; that's what
ISVs are for.
If there is sufficient demand for an application, I'm sure some company
will decide they are willing to take your money and satisfy your demand.
Maybe Adobe would like to contribute one as a public service?
Maybe you've never talked to Adobe. :-)
* This is not a slam at the FSF, just a statement that we operate differently.tom@ICASE.EDU (Tom Crockett) (06/06/89)
> *Excerpts from xpert: 6-Jun-89 Re: PostScript Previewer --..* > *rws@expo.lcs.mit.edu (637)* > Producing specific > applications to meet market demand has never been a goal; that's what > ISVs are for. Well maybe so, but the core distribution does contain a mail reader, a text editor, a terminal emulator, a man page browser, a load average monitor, and a bunch of demos. It can be argued that all of these are applications and are in some sense extraneous to the window system itself. Presumably they were included because they were deemed to be useful. Evidently a lot of people think a PostScript previewer would be useful as well, so I though I'd at least suggest it. I gather that the answer is "probably not"? It doesn't have to go into the core distribution either. It could just as well go into contrib.
rws@EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU (06/06/89)
Presumably they were included because they were deemed to be useful.
The significant ones are there because the MIT staff couldn't be productive
without them; we maintain our own environment, and we ship what we maintain.
We are productive without a public PostScript previewer (and when we really
need one, we just use the one we purchased, on the machine it was bought for.)
Other core clients are low enough overhead to deal with.
I gather that the answer is "probably not"?
We aren't going to develop one. We are unlikely to be able to buy one.
If someone wants to donate one ...dyer@spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer) (06/07/89)
In article <AYWykmz0-cs20WYl8s@icase> tom@ICASE.EDU (Tom Crockett) writes: >Well maybe so, but the core distribution does contain a mail reader, a text >editor, a terminal emulator, a man page browser, a load average monitor, and a >bunch of demos. Presumably they were included because they were deemed to >be useful. Presumably they had another advantage--someone already wrote them. The original bellyacher was complaining that neither ghostscript nor xps, two attempts at Postscript previewing, were as useful as they could be, implying that the X Consortium has some sort of responsibility to provide something better. Jesus. -- Steve Dyer dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer dyer@arktouros.mit.edu
smikes@cbnewsi.ATT.COM (steven.mikes) (06/08/89)
I think the summary line says it all. My opinions are my own, not those of any other person or organization.