José Matos wrote:
On Tuesday 12 September 2006 10:10, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
I believe on the contrary that that's the only way to achieve something
in this list. If not for the shouting xforms and qt3 would have been
maintained painfully until 1.5.
That is the problem with the "cry wolf" type of strategies, they are good in
the short term and bad in the long term.
I agree but the problem in this list is that questions and opinions are
often ignored if you don't express them repeatedly.
Don't forget also the first introduction of qt to lyx, the klyx fork. The
reaction to Matthias announcement was such that in practice we had clearly
ignored the port, even although the code was there.
So diplomacy is not a wasted effort it is a must in a project like this.
Well, I honestly try to be diplomatic with most of people in this list.
But I admit I did not try too much recently with Lars. Sorry Lars.
Honestly do you think that xforms would have remained after including
unicode?
The xform frontend could have been maintained and restricted to the 8
bit ascii subset of unicode. It _was_ possible really and not that much
work if you think about it. At least not more work than qt3 or gtk for
someone who knows xforms.
Now, the consensus was there for xforms so, no, I don't think it would
have survived unicode.
Abdel.
