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

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: why kdelibs?
From:       Matt Williams <lists () milliams ! com>
Date:       2010-10-28 18:53:02
Message-ID: AANLkTintHFBMxhHjiAKtdTZmRqwTOgJh0ffSZ-m1b6mL () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 28 October 2010 16:47, John Layt <johnlayt@googlemail.com> wrote:
> In general, we provide lots of convenience classes and methods for things that
> are either awkward to do in Qt, or you have to do yourself.   The concept of
> being an add-on module to Qt providing stuff to make Qt coding easier is
> valid, but then we also have lots of stuff designed for integration into our
> platform, like consistency between apps and localization that others may not
> need.

And I think that this is the issue some people have with using KDE
libraries -- that there's no clear distinction between these two parts
of the "KDE Platform". And that's kind of the problem, it's marketed
as a _platform_ making it seem 'bloated' to people who might only want
to use KStandardActions or KIO in their application.

I would love to be able to say to people, "you don't need to be a
''KDE application' to use KDE libraries. kde-core-libs offers a number
of very nice libraries extending Qt with no other dependencies." I
guess this is where the KDE minimisation project (or whatever it's
called) is going and this to me demonstrates to that it's not _just_
useful for embedded devices.

Especially with the recent news of Qt breaking apart into smaller
projects (http://labs.qt.nokia.com/2010/10/26/qt-is-going-modular/) I
think there's a place for a few smaller KDE libraries to fit into the
picture shown in that blog post (somewhere near "Other Qt solutions").
While, of course, keeping rocking with our wonderfully integrated
desktop environment.

-- 
Matt Williams
http://milliams.com

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