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

List:       kde-freeqt
Subject:    Re: [freeqt] Future of Harmony
From:       Stephan Kulow <coolo () itm ! mu-luebeck ! de>
Date:       1998-11-23 15:07:16
[Download RAW message or body]

> 
> Andy Tai wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > > Well, I totally agree with that as a policy; I'd like gtk to speak KDE
> > > as well as possible so you can produce a KDE app in gtk - perhaps that's
> > > my next project? ;)
> > 
> > If so, that's different from Hayes' vision of "merging into one solution."
> > There would still be two projects, but they can share more standards and
> > interoperability.  (That's fine.) But Hayes' original  "resigning" letter is
> > unjustified because it implies there is no point to work on Gnome and
> > everyone should switch to KDE instead.
> > 
> > The way to go is not to have KDE absorbing GNOME developers, but to have the
> > two projects be compatiblle in common protocols.
> > Common protocols also allow the use of different toolkits.  Star Office
> > supports KDE but it does not use Qt.
> > 
> 
> I'd go even further. It would be nice if some of the libraries can be
> shared between the two projects. One example would be using Imlib for
> pixmaps in QT (kind of like Harmony does). Another would be if C++
> wrappers could be built around Orbit and if Orbit can be made fully
> CORBA compliant. That way more code could be shared between the two
> projects and less work replicated between them.
> 
If Orbit becomes stable and is better than MICO in more than one
respect (I know many are talking about C++ bloat and such stuff),
I see no problem why KDE couldn't adopt it. MICO works fine and 
works now.

Greetings, Stephan

-- 
Stephan Kulow (coolo@kde.org)
detrever lleps ot ysae ylgnizama s'ti

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