On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 11:04 PM, Aaron J. Seigo<aseigo@kde.org> wrote:

>
> if you want a great example, just consider that GNOME People was proposed as a
> blocker for Akonadi on fd.o despite People being a complete toy in comparison.
> why? yep, it's written in glib/vala and so it "trumps" the Qt/C++ option for
> some people. i really tire of dealing with that kind of situation as it does
> nothing but work against the goal of a great F/OSS desktop patform. perhaps
> you can understand why i find your suggestion of standardizing on c and glib
> to be discouraging and dangerous.
>

Not sure. At least it *is* a standard. Every software framework can be
split into components which can be reused elsewhere. If you want that
kind of reusability, you need to *decide* on a standard technology to
define library interfaces. It hurts, contradicts the freedom of the
developers, but i think it's important. Not for everything, not for
high level services like Akonadi, but for the really basic platform
features.

Interestingly - what i'm suggesting - is happening anyway. But not
through collaboration but through division of labor. Newer platform
technologies are mainly created by Gnome developers in GObject and C,
and KDE is using them (wrinkling their nose ;-). Why not follow this
direction more actively by re-evaluating technologies that already
exist in the KDE stack as well? In the long run it might be an
advantage beeing able to focus on higher layers, where competitive
innovation really adds value, rather than putting off people with
unnessecary chaos at the basis.

Norbert