On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Tomaz Canabrava <[email protected]> wrote: >> juk should be a lightweigth music player, while amarok should be an >> all-featured media player. I say should because juk is in a stage >> where it's not lightweigth, for the code there needs much love. that >> said, juk is part of KDE software, while Amarok does not follow the >> KDE rules to be part of the official package. ( same release dates for >> instance ) >> >> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Lydia Pintscher >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 03:15, Michael Pyne <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> On Monday, August 08, 2011 18:44:40 Tomaz Canabrava wrote: >>>>>> Juk is an easy target, and in need of love. >>>>> >>>>> Honestly I was going to recommend the same thing. >>>>> >>>>> I don't agree that it's (all) easy (although there is certainly a lot of >>>>> "low- >>>>> hanging fruit"), but it does have the advantage that I'm at least >>>>> available by >>>>> email to help guide/mentor. >>>>> >>>>> In addition I will be completing school very soon, which hopefully should >>>>> add >>>>> some time per day (although that may be offset by the new job I will be >>>>> rotating to soon which will probably involve a longer commute). >>>>> >>>>> Either way, JuK could use some love, there's still someone mostly-active >>>>> who >>>>> can show interested parties around the codebase and I should have piped >>>>> in on >>>>> one of these requests awhile ago (but I've always assumed someone else has >>>>> need the help more ;( ) >>>> >>>> Thanks guys. I've suggested him to take a look at JuK. >>>> >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> Lydia >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Lydia Pintscher >>>> KDE Community Working Group member >>>> http://kde.org - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher >>>> >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Just wondering, but why is there Amorok and JuK? Surely Amarok can do >>> everything JuK can right? >>> JuK even looks "a bit" like Amarok. >>> No pun intended! >>> >>> Thanx, >>> Mark >>> >> > > Ah oke. Just some idea i have now.. Right now someone is working on a > Phonon QML thing. Wouldn't it be best for JuK to be (mostly) rewritten > using the phonon QML thing? I mean, KDE 5 seems to be going towards > QML, Dolphin seems to go in that direction and Dragon 3 is already > using QML : http://apachelog.wordpress.com/2011/08/07/dragon-player-3/ > > Just some random thought.. > > And how do i even need to see YuK? As a foobar alternative for KDE?
Dolphin is going in the QML direction? Yes, I think a Juk rewritten in QML could be a good thing. > Thanx, > Mark >
