KWIG Qt->Gtk porting layer and merging main loops.
nf2 at scheinwelt.at
Fri Oct 29 17:33:52 EEST 2004
On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 12:52, Piotr Szymanski wrote:
> nf (Friday 29 of October 2004 04:32):
> > 2) Use KIO: That would require everyone to link to a huge graphical
> > toolkit library. Even when using the VFS from the command line...
> Or wait for qt4 by then (Q3 2005 if i remember correctly) the library
> (libQtCore.so) will be as small as glib. I dont really feel well about making
> KDE 100% depend on glib (an you can be sure it wont be welcomed in KDE as
> well), making arts depend on glib only resulted in most of developers moving
> back to an older version of arts.
Would it be a compromise to move glib to fd.org and call it fd_glib?
I think - one day - you will have to make a decision on the hierarchy of
technologies: Choose one technology for the tiny common back-end bits
and others for the layer above that.
Agreeing on a common back-end "technology" (fd_glib i would suggest)
doesn't say anything about the design of the common libraries. The
design should be done by both "camps", making their VFS, component
system or whatever compatible, picking the best concepts.
Do you really want that stupid porting and code duplication thing to go
on forever - porting K3B to gnome, porting mozilla, openoffice.org or
the gimp to KDE - which just creates a big mess?
More information about the xdg