On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 15:22 +1030, Andrew Mason wrote: > Qt is just the framework which makes building the functionality of > applications easier......so not every bit of functionality that an > application > has should wind up in Qt. The more uncommon or complex the application, the > more non-qt components you will end up using.
absolutely. my problem is with the common stuff that is easily done with Qt but instead uses needless KDE API code. > Konsole although it may seem simple enough from a UI perspective is actually > quite a complicated application. i've been working with it specifically and found that the UI is quite replaceable with Qt. however, i would argue it's overly complicated and does not take advantage of many Qt features which would greatly simplify the code. > Dependencies are only an issue if the application doesn't actually 'depend' > on > them. If the application needs them to function correctly then it's better to > have lots of smaller packges which only include that bit of functionality so > that other applications don't also have to carry around / maintain the code > in > their application. i agree and Konsole surely does not require things like KWebkit. > Likewise if functionality is added to Qt it's self then more qt will need to > become more modular so that applications can pick and choose which parts of > qt > to include.So you still have the deps, they are just called something else. > > Perhaps the question I should be asking is , what are you trying to achieve ? i would like to see KDE apps be leaner and much more conformant to Qt. i would like to see applications like Konsole to only need two small packages installed instead of a hundred of which 98 are irrelevant. i would also like to see a pony. ;) -Gravis >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
