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
