https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=299517
--- Comment #34 from Olivier BELLEUX <o.g.m.bell...@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Nate Graham from comment #33) > That's more or less how it actually works. :) The part that's the same > (SANE) is common, and the part you can see (the user interface) is made with > different tools: Qt and GTK and so on.What I think you're trying to say > though is that Qt and GTK shouldn't be separate; we should have a single UI > toolkit or set of low-level application development tools that are common to > everybody, and each environment would just write a custom UI on top of it > according to their HIG. > > And yeah, that would be great. But Qt and GTK both *do* exist. And > Enlightenment, and Flutter, and a bunch of others. We can't go back in time > and delete them all except for one. For better or worse, we are stuck in a > world with multiple GUI toolkits. And this means that you can't just grab > the code from an app that's written in another GUI toolkit; it doesn't work > like that. To use your car metaphor, it would be like trying to put the > engine from a Volkswagen into a Honda. By the time you made it work, it > would have been easier, cheaper and work better to just get a new engine for > the Honda! That's the situation here with this feature; how SimpleScan > implements the feature is not applicable for Skanlite because of all the > other technical differences between them. > > Fortunately, a new scanning app called SkanPage is under heavy development. > It already has this feature and I expect it will eventually replace Skanlite > over time. It uses the same backend SANE library but it's written with a > more modern user interface component set which makes it easier to work on > and extend in the future. Dear Nate, This is indeed more or less my idea: to do, as much as possible, in common on commonly used tools, in order to allow developers to concentrate on the specificities of their DE. I find that each environment has its advantages and disadvantages; for me, KDE's track record outweighs Gnome or other DEs; but KDE can't be suitable for everyone, and that's good, otherwise Linux wouldn't exist. On the other hand, reducing "what you can't see" to SANE seems to me to be reductive: it seems to me that some of the code is sandwiched between the stuff (in Qt or in GTK) that you click on and SANE. Skanlite as well as Simple-scan are far from offering as many features as Xsane and its Windows 95 style interface. The interface to SANE could be "terminal" for all or in GTK or Qt etc... while offering the same functionality. This principle seems to me to be extensible to other cases: in instant messaging, protocols (irc, xmpp, matrix, telegram) and GUIs are not lacking (konversation, polari, kopete, pidgin, neochat...): wouldn't it be simpler to use only "libpurple" and its plugins and to graft a GUI to it either in GTK (Pidgin) or in Qt/qml (Kukupa which means "pigeon" in Maori)? That way the focus would be more on the code that you don't see but does almost everything rather than the code that you see but doesn't do much. I read your blog posts every weekend and I have never read a critical, or hurtful, word for another DE from you. Unfortunately for many, developing software is reinventing the wheel, over and over again, to claim that the other guy can't code. Instead of favouring the quantity of bad or average software, it seems to me that free software should favour transversal collaborations to provide less numerous but better quality software. With the amount of work provided for several competing software we could have a very good one with two Guis adapted to our DEs -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
