On Monday 12 December 2011 00:55:15 Gravis wrote: > 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. Fair enough but as your probably aware the UI is not the only component of konsole..
> > > 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. So does konsole 'require' it to build ? If not isn't that a packaging issue ( i.e distro ) rather than KDE specifically ? or does KWebkit provide some functionality which you are saying Qt can provide also ? apt-cache show konsole Depends: kde-runtime, libc6 (>= 2.4), libkdecore5 (>= 4:4.6.3), libkdeui5 (>= 4:4.6.3), libkio5 (>= 4:4.6.3), libknotifyconfig4 (>= 4:4.6.3), libkparts4 (>= 4:4.6.3), libkpty4 (>= 4:4.6.3), libqt4-dbus (>= 4:4.5.3), libqtcore4 (>= 4:4.7.0~beta1), libqtgui4 (>= 4:4.6.1), libstdc++6 (>= 4.4.0), libx11-6 i don't see kwebkit there specifically ....my guess is that it's the kdebase- runtime dep that would be bringing in kwebkit...does it compile without that ? > > > 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 don't think anyone is against leaner KDE apps so long as you don't loose the ability to add functionality that you require. For example the 2 packages probably wouldn't include dbus / notification libraries which at least for my use case are required...other people may not need notifications with konsole but they may want some other functionality. I think that may be challenging ... > 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. ;) Nothing wrong with wanting a pony but i hear they are hard to maintain :) > > -Gravis >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
