On Wed, 23 Oct 2002, Edwin Leuven wrote: > It just makes me sad to see scarce resources (developer time) being directed > towards the xforms frontend which in turn delays qt with in turn delays inset > unification which in turn etc etc
We have three frontends. I'm sure there are a few people (most probably users or leaders of free software organisations) who are sad that we are wasting developer time on XForms and Qt when we should be getting the Gnome port working. Likewise OS-X users who wish we'd get our acts together and switch to the best interface in the known universe. GUII gives choice to users _and_ developers. The XForms port won't die while people use and maintain it -- or want to use it as a experimental playground. Besides, the XForms port has such a developed class structure (maybe a few refinements left) that porting to FLTK should be a relative breeze -- start by copying the tree and then fix the compiler errors -- and it should form a good base for other ports too. That's why it was always called the reference port. Now that XForms has source available we should hopefully see distros picking it up so it shouldn't be as obscure as it has been. Oh and one other reason: It was hoped that GUII would attract other developers to the project as _they_ ported LyX to _their_ favourite toolkit and hopefully stuck around to maintain that port and work on other parts of LyX. This aspect has been successful IMO. It is wrong to expect that LyX should be a single toolkit app. FWIW, if Angus makes the XForms Document code use the controller he's working in familiar (complete) territory and will not only fill in the gaps in the existing Document controller but is likely to fix bugs that a known working interface ported to use that controller will show up. Sure this doesn't get the Qt Document code written but it still benefits Qt because once the controller is known to work your Qt coding skills can complete the task quickly. Likewise when he moves onto MVCing Preferences (or someone else tackles it) that will benefit Qt. Maybe it might ease your mind to think of the XForms port as a unit test rig for the Qt frontend -- if the XForms port continues to function then the specifications have been met. In summary, we all win if Angus directs his time and energy into the stuff he's the expert at. Allan. (ARRae)
