> On 4 Aug 2015, at 11:46 pm, Dennis E. Hamilton <[email protected]> > wrote: > > The actual construction of a functioning editor that might be available in a > source release and also a convenience binary for one or more platforms is a > bit down the road. I understand that. > > Nevertheless, I am concerned that this podling is playing with fire and > tempting unfortunate consequences. > > I just want to give fair warning that even an "example" having only > unapproved dependencies may be frowned upon if one cannot build a fully > functioning version from the release without such a dependency. Satisfying > that condition would be a great example and also in the spirit and letter of > ASF requirements for software provided by its projects. > > The NULL case that I have seen described does not qualify as > fully-functioning, in my opinion. I look forward to further details in that > approach so one can explore providing a reference version having full > functionality the substitutability of dependencies, including optional use of > Qt.
As part of the abstraction layer I am developing, my intention is to make a Cocoa backend (Apple’s API for building native OS X apps), as well as a Qt backend. Thus we will have at least one platform on which it is possible to build a fully-functioning version of the editor, and thus we can include it as a core component of a Corinthia distribution. The Qt backend will be optional in the sense that someone can choose not to use it, if they prefer to instead write their own abstraction layer for whatever platform they are targeting. Contributions in the form of code to help support more platforms without Qt will be very welcome. — Dr Peter M. Kelly [email protected] PGP key: http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key <http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key> (fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966)
