On Freitag, 9. Mai 2014 13:44:18 CEST, John Layt wrote:=0A=0A> Thanks f=
or that link, it explains things very nicely.  Between their=0A> lack o=
f resources and the "GnomeOS" philosophy it will be interesting=0A> to =
see how they respond to our approaches: in the article they clearly=0A>=
 state only a mass rebellion from Gtk's users would prompt them to=0A> =
focus on cross-desktop/platform improvements.=0A=0AWell, wireshark is m=
oving to Qt =3D) and eg. Audacious devs don't seem very happy with CSD =
either:=0Ahttp://redmine.audacious-media-player.org/boards/1/topics/113=
5=0A=0AIt's on their newspage under "More GTK+ 3.x nonsense" ...=0A=0AT=
he XFCE bugreport [1] Martin mentioned has a rather opposing tone reg. =
bending towards gnome demands (their WM is in the same trap as KWin in =
that to alter the meaning of MWM_DECORATION would require to update all=
 decoration themes/plugins), LXDE is apparently about to finish the cha=
nge towards Qt as well ...=0A=0A=0A=0A=3D> Is anybody aware of existing=
 efforts for a (plain) Qt zenity drop-in replacemt?=0A=0AAtm. I assume =
that the only relevant GNOME bit that should probably be covered (so th=
at users don't have to rewrite scripts for kdialog or similar)=0A=0AEma=
cs users are apparently trapped :-( - but there're enough great editors=
 (esp. such that focus on being an editor and not a single process GNU =
OS ;-)=0A=0AAtm. I'm in the mood to write some sort of "qtdialog" this =
weekend, that one could symlink to "zenity" and then simply ignore this=
 (and other) GTK+ moves into self-isolation.=0A=0ACheers,=0AThomas=0A=0A=
[1] https://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D10631