On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Tomaz Canabrava <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 >> >
Well, in that direction.. it's not written in QML or anything.. : http://ppenz.blogspot.com/2011/08/introducing-dolphin-20.html
