2010/10/31 Alexander Neundorf <neund...@kde.org>: > On Sunday 31 October 2010, todd rme wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Michael Jansen > <k...@michael-jansen.biz>wrote: > ... >> > 1. Small improvements to the Qt Libraries >> > >> > Those are the so called convenient classes. Classes the have been added >> > to the >> > KDE Libs because of some shortcomings of the Qt Classes or to add some >> > convenience methods. I guess classes like KUrl and KIcon (at least parts) >> > fall >> > into that category. >> > >> > The classes in this category do not add additional functionality, >> > requirements >> > or anything else to the Qt Classes. >> >> I think this sounds like the place to start, for several reasons: > > I don't think the place to start is merging something into Qt. > _We_ can't merge something ourselves, it must be accepted. So we would be > stuck at the first step. > > IMO the place to start must be to reorganize our libraries so that we can > clearly separate these different types, i.e. "enhancements which should be in > Qt", "addons", "platform". > Once we have this (I would estimate something like a year of work), we may > start to try to get some of the enhancements into Qt. > And if it doesn't get accepted then, still no problem, since by then it will > have the form of a smallish library with very few or no dependencies beside > the Qt libs.
Absolutely. I think that this is the most sensible and practical approach to take. -- Matt Williams http://milliams.com