On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 01:15:12AM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 09:49:42PM +0100, José Matos wrote: > > > On Tuesday 21 August 2007 21:35:46 Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > > > > > > The Qt3 frontend is still available from svn. If there had been > > > > a real interest in further development it would have happened. > > > > > > At the time there was interest, but it was nevertheless removed. > > > > Enrico, in the interest of historical truth (whatever that is :-) > > ), I have suggested (as release manager) to re-enable it for 1.5 > > after Greve's meeting. The only person who replied to me was Geog > > that said that he was no more interested. > > Sure, it would have been easier to keep it alive than trying to rise > it again from the dead.
It would have eaten resources from a dozen or so active developers which would have reluctantly invested part of there time to maintain qt3. We would have needed workarounds and even more conditional compilation than we have now. Open source simply does not work that way. If somebody is interested there will be maintanance. The contrapositon of that is: If there's no maintanance, then nobody was interested. As we saw nobody working on qt3 (and Gtk for that matter) the conclusion is that nobody actually was interested. The commercial world works slightly different, but as nobody payed real money for qt3/gtk maintanace, a similar conclusion can be reached: There is also no commercial interest (surprise...). > Yes, they are better spent in adding new build systems. I stand in my > opinion that the Qt3 and gtk frontends were murdered. And nobody called the police. I sometimes murder mosquitos, too, Andre'
