Why codetyphon is not part of Lazarus

[kilon]

I was wondering about the reasoning of codetyphon not being part of Lazarus. It seems from the web site that they offer the full source so whats stoping from making codetyphon part of lazarus if people find it so useful ?

[BigChimp]

Ask the CT guys

Some of their components etc may have a different license than Lazrus (Laz has modified LGPL for the non-IDE parts) which might be a reason for the Laz devs not to accept their components.

[kilon]

very good point

[JD]

They also deliberately rename some Lazarus components in their CodeTyphon offering. For example, TMapViewer was given a name like GIS component or something like that.

I don't know if they have the right to do that but nobody seems to complaining for now.

[ludob]

Codetyphon can do what they do because they are not lazarus nor fpc. Lazarus and fpc have a fairly strict release process which results in few releases per year/decade. Codetyphon just picks out a version of lazarus and fpc trunk (unstable), idem for the added components,  runs some minimal tests and releases it every few months. IIRC ct 2.5 was released with a lazarus svn version that was only 2 days old. That means a very minimal test suite to release a new version. The same for a lot of the components that are not stable releases but svn versions with ct patches (most of the renamed components pl_... are patched versions).
So the day ct becomes part of lazarus, the release frequency drops down to .... and the interest of ct is gone. Consider ct as a "developer's snapshot on steroids".

[avra]

They will not merge since they have different goals, but both will benefit from each other greatly. People who like the easy way of cross compilation in CT with so many targets, or tons of components CT provides all at once, or provided IDE patches will stick with CT and benefit from Laz development.  People who know how to setup cross compilation themselves (or just prefer that way), or people who use fpcup, or people who don't like zillion components at once, might benefit from CT by finding components converted from Delphi by CT team that do not exist on any other place (just check it out and be amazed), or they find existing components patched for use on WinCE or some other platform. Some CT patches will also find their way into Lazarus. I think it's a win-win situation for all, and I don't see a problem with their coexistance or a need for a forced merge. Some merging will happen behind the scene over time, but these projects will stay separated.

[JD]

They will not merge since they have different goals, but both will benefit from each other greatly. People who like the easy way of cross compilation in CT with so many targets, or tons of components CT provides all at once, or provided IDE patches will stick with CT and benefit from Laz development.  People who know how to setup cross compilation themselves (or just prefer that way), or people who use fpcup, or people who don't like zillion components at once, might benefit from CT by finding components converted from Delphi by CT team that do not exist on any other place (just check it out and be amazed), or they find existing components patched for use on WinCE or some other platform. Some CT patches will also find their way into Lazarus. I think it's a win-win situation for all, and I don't see a problem with their coexistance or a need for a forced merge. Some merging will happen behind the scene over time, but these projects will stay separated.

I agree with you. They can coexist for now. BTW I've also picked some components from CT for my Lazarus installation so I find it useful in that sense. I was a little disappointed with their port of Delphi Cindy components (too limited in my opinion) but one can't have it all I guess.