Hi Olafur.
I will also support anybody that wants to create a open source clone of WPS, I will also jump into that ship too.
First I will like to remember two things:
- PM is the OS/2 GUI
- WPS is the desktop shell. The objects that organize the GUI to create the desktop interpretation (based on a real's world desktop) of the OS. WPS requires SOM and PM to show itself as it is.
But why, if I had to choose a priority, I will choose PM first (
warning, this is the interpretation I do based in my knowledge) :
1) I tried to list all the applications that uses WPS - here it is the
list on the wiki. The WPS applications that are available are minimal compared to the PM applications that we have available on this platform. Maybe XWorkplace is the most evolved WPS based project with more classes, but it does not compare to the quantity of applications that requires PM.
2) PM is the real GUI of the OS/2 platform and that will be a definitive real good step on open sourcing the platform and have a continue future for it.
Other alternative like trying to mask the PM methods and behind it use Qt will be interesting too. For example if you replace the method that calls the "Save As.." window from PM and call the one from Qt it can be an interesting trick if it can be done, so the developer do not have to write all the method, only write the "conversion mask" and reuse the Qt code (It requires knowledge of both things Qt and PM). But the trick will have to be that the PM applications think they are using PM while at the end is Qt, and that the application does not stops working/breaks.
Other road is not to clone PM and to try to port other GUI over OS/2-eCS.
Unity,
Razor-Qt or even the not-yet-created
Quantum OS (that uses Qt 5 and QML). On that road what will have is two different and incompatible GUIs and there will be a lot of effort to try start creating applications for that GUI until the majority of users migrate (or start to like) that new GUI. It will create a lot of friction (just like the initial eCS 1.0 Vs OS/2 Warp 4.5 friction that we used to have on 2000), but maybe in the long term we can have an individual OS/2 users with the new GUI and the legacy users (corporate) that requires PM because they have a PM application that they refuse to leave and does not have an equivalent on the new GUI . So it can be a interesting bumpy road

....and maybe someone will say.. "this is the OS/2-eCS community, isn't PM an important part of the platform?"
My main concern is that we may have ideas, but we don't have any developers, money or corporate support that are willing to jump into any of this possibilities. I only wish I can do anything to try to convince someone with more resource (money/knowledge/time) like Arca Noae, Bitwise works, Mensys/XEU, or individual developer groups to do something for the long term (and open) future of the platform. They are doing a great job on what the do, but nobody wants (or do not have the time) to start touching the things under the OS/2 hood. The excuse I get is "if it is not broken, don't fix it"...but to me it means "
boiling the frog" (the metaphor)