[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: why kdelibs?
From:       Boudewijn Rempt <boud () valdyas ! org>
Date:       2010-10-31 14:58:23
Message-ID: 201010311558.23582.boud () valdyas ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On Saturday 30 October 2010, Albert Astals Cid wrote:

> Seriously, i see no gain and lots of pain. Because the "gain" in your words is 
> "they will maintain our stuff because we have no manpower and they do", but we 
> have learnt that is not true, so where is the gain?

Well, I really have to sort of agree with you here. Looking at Qt, excellent as it \
is, and I would hate having to work to something else, it's quite obvious that \
Nokia/Qt Software cannot maintain everything they have created. QGraphicsView is \
fundamental to Nokia, yet only two or three people seem to be working on it. Phonon, \
QPrinter, QTextDocument... QMainWindow and QDockWidget stink, and Maya and Dreamworks \
have had to hack around it, just like Amarok and KOffice. It all chimes in with your \
argument. I don't think ladling the kde libs into Qt, even if it would be possible, \
would solve it. It would just add to the deprecation marathon that any big \
development environment seems bound to become.

On the other hand, Krita would, I am sure, much bigger if it didn't depend on the KDE \
platform. For KOffice, we had to hack down kdelibs and package a pre-generated sycoca \
to make it work. The platform fills in the holes on unix platforms, but it's a pain \
everywhere else.

-- 
Boudewijn Rempt | http://www.valdyas.org
Ceterum censeo lapsum particulorum probae delendum esse


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]