Developers, developers, developers...

[Shane Fagan]

Hey Maciej,

We do know about the lack of a great Ubuntu specific IDE and
there were a few sessions that talked about it at the last UDS.
The issues are being looked at over the next few cycles. 

On the lack of books we dont have any in shops but if you google
GTK+ programming <language> you will get docs about it. So for C/C++
look here http://library.gnome.org/devel/gtk-tutorial/stable/ this is
a very very good tutorial step by step for each part of GTK+ in C. So
its just a quick trip to google to find what you want no buying of books
needed :)

We are going to put up a http://developer.ubuntu.com I wasnt at the
sessions myself so maybe someone else can clarify whats going on there.

There are some things you can look into right now and they are Quickly
and Quickly-Widgets. They smooth over so much of the insanity that is in
the current systems. Its mainly in python but there is a C/C++ template
and I made a Vala template in the last cycle that isnt quite ready for
widespread use yet. 

Anyway I hope some of that clarifies the situation at the moment, the
only thing I can say is we are looking into it and it should get a lot
better very soon.

--fagan

On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 18:05 +0100, Maciej Pilichowski wrote:
> Hello,
> 
>   Do you remember this? You don't have to like S.Ballmer, but you have 
> to admit -- he's got the point.
> 
>   I am software developer for over 2 decades, I use Linux for over one 
> decade. And I am more and more concerned, that in Linux world 
> development is done by accident -- there is no Linux-specific, 
> well-fitted, modern framework (db+language+GUI+IDE), and (partially 
> as effect of this) there no books about it (count all books about 
> programming in KDE or Gnome, published recently, count near 0, 
> correct?).
> 
>   Compare this to how Microsoft is pushing things -- new languages 
> (plural!), new GUI, their own database, their own IDE. You don't have 
> to use it to develop anything for Microsoft system, but manufacturer 
> of the product provides tools for the development. Pretty convenient, 
> if you ask me. 
> 
>   And if you go to Amazon, and search for C#, F#, WPF, ASP, MVC, I 
> assure you, you get a lot of hits, and lot of them are fresh.
> 
> 
>   With all those changes going on with Ubuntu, it is hard to nice all 
> of them are consumer oriented. Canonical gives, consumer takes. I 
> have nothing against with such model of business, but bug # 1 is 
> still open in Launchpad, so if you are serious about making the 
> difference you (Canonical, and all Ubuntu devs) have to:
> 
> a) deliver killer-apps -- so far, I can think of just one, it's bash
> 
> b) help developers to develop programs for Linux/Ubuntu, to help you 
> in return
> 
> For developers it is fun writting programs, but if the struggle begins 
> with putting together the framework and getting clear documentation, 
> then probably majority of developers have better things to do -- i.e. 
> writting programs. Only developers fueled with ideology can be 
> interested in solving the most basics things, just because "it is 
> right".
> 
>   I don't know if this makes enough of the wake-up ring, but at least, 
> if you don't do anything about it, you won't have excuse -- you heard 
> it. Microsoft (and not only it) knew and knows the importance of 
> ISV -- now is the question, if Ubuntu/Canonical realizes this 
> importance as well?
> 
>   I would just suggest -- focus on something, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, make 
> your choice, but make it for (really) good. Even such company as 
> Microsoft or Oracle does not have unlimited resources (Canonical till 
> now behaves like it is an exception) -- they use the snowball effect 
> (while we had [x] widget shift in Ubuntu, Microsoft was busy 
> polishing ASP/MVC -- what was the impact on developers?). Then build 
> your own tools, or use and support a package of third party stuff. 
> And then provide "a bible" -- thorough documentation how to use those 
> tools. Of course all this has to be comparable with modern solutions, 
> nobody will be interested in programming in Cobol/Tk using 
> Ubuntu ;-).
>   
> 
>   That's all for know. I hope my point in regard to wishful thinking 
> about bug #1 is clear. 
> 
>   Your call.
> 
> 
> Kind regards,
>