> If small and self-reliant are the criteria, how does FLTK > (http://www.fltk.org/index.php) stack up? For something like > cmake-gui it would probably work just fine, and AFAIK it doesn't > require GTK... it uses LGPLv2 with a static linking exception, so > it's probably as good/better than the current Qt requirement in that > department.
Oddly, I don't have any direct experience with FLTK even though I've known about it for years. The projects I get involved with usually need a lot more native UI integration, so FLTK is never on the list. And I personally prefer native UI experience. But for something small like the CMake GUI, it wouldn't bother me as much. That said, it sounds like this is not a rewrite, so I guess the conversation is moot. Thanks, Eric -- Powered by www.kitware.com Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Kitware offers various services to support the CMake community. For more information on each offering, please visit: CMake Support: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/support.html CMake Consulting: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/consulting.html CMake Training Courses: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/training.html Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
