From: Thursday <nospam@...>
Date: 2005-04-24T18:29:32+09:00
Subject: innaccurate/misleading portrayal of project on rubyforge

This gui toolkit comparison page (last edited August 2004) at 
rubyforge.org states that ruby bindings for wxWindows (now wxWidgets) 
could not be found--it says "Could not find one" to be exact:
 
http://freeride.rubyforge.org/wiki/wiki.pl?GUIFrameworkProject/GUIComparison

But according to this page (found by google), wxRuby project started in 
September 2002 with the first public release about a year later and the 
latest release about 5 months ago:

http://wxruby.rubyforge.org/wiki/wiki.pl

I'm sure this was an unintentional oversite on the comparison chart, but 
it probably makes at least some visitors view that page as full of 
biased and misleading info.

Perhaps some credibility can be restored by backing up claims about 'API 
elegance', speed, memory footprint, etc. with specific examples.

Also, I just downloaded wxWidgets 2.6.0 and compiled an example program 
using DialogBlocks 1.9.4 which ended up being < 1MB in size on Windows 
2000...I was expecting something several times that size given the 
comparison to FOX on the comparison page...

I wonder what I'll find if I compare the 'API elegance' of each GUI 
toolkit given this pattern so far...especially since that is far more 
subjective than whether a project exists or the relative memory footprint.

I don't think this kind of mistake accurately portrays the cooperative 
and honest spirit of the ruby community.  In addition to correcting the 
page, perhaps the kind folks at rubyforge would think of something nice 
they can do for wxruby and wxWidgets projects to make up for this unjust 
portrayal.  Like mentioning licensing terms of each (FOX having the most 
unfriendly toward closed-source commercial projects, FLTK being less 
restrictive, and wxWidgets having the least restrictive license in this 
regard).

DISCLAIMER: by FOX, I mean FOX TOOLKIT, not the cable news channel.