[EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
>
> Jo Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > Ok, in accordance with Christian's suggestion it's time for a vote to
> > decide what to do with Harmony. The options are:
> >
> > a) Stop development of Harmony as an independent toolkit and instead
> > become a source of Qt patches (Christian's idea)
> >
> > or
> >
> > b) Ignore the Qt license changes and carry on as before.
>
> What exactly are we voting on, will any developer who disagrees
> with the final outcome stay with the project? Why would they?
> This isn't like a technical detail of the project (gtk wrapper vs.
> native, or gpl vs. lgpl) where one might disagree and keep working ,
> is it? I mean if the majority vote to ignore the Qt license change,
> will Jo and Christian really keep contributing to Harmony, and if
> they do, will their hearts really be in it?
Well, no, I won't and I won't contribute. Basically I suppose
it's 'can we use Harmony as a name for a Qt patch repository'.
> Perhaps what we're really looking at is a complete project split:
> one project to re-use Harmony code as patches to Qt 2, and
> another to continue Harmony as standalone. Obviously, they will
> need new names (I like Gnu Tea :-), and maybe one of them will
> get a minority of the developers and have a longer road ahead, but
> hopefully there could still be co-operation between all three
> projects, both 'Harmonies' and Gnome.
Yep, that's about it.
> But since Jo called for a vote, vote I shall. I choose (a), and if the
> projects split, I will go with the group patching Qt, and if the only
> project that continues is one of making Harmony a better stand-
> alone lib, I will look on with interest and hope, but I doubt I will find
> the motivation to contribute.
Thankyou.
> What I really hope for, however, is Hayes' dream. Technical
> difficulties will arise, but they will be overcome... I look forward to
> the time when I will be able to choose between two or more GUI
> toolkits, each with their own strengths, and my program will still
> run cleanly and beautifully on any of the standard Linux desktop
> environments. And maybe on some other Unix boxes and NT as
> well. :-)
I agree. I think those two toolkits should be gtk and Qt, but I'm
happy to see Harmony as one of them if I don't get sued ;)
> --Chouser
>
--
Jo
Harmony - the project to create an LGPL Qt clone
http://harmony.ruhr.de
