On Donnerstag, 9. November 2017 15:32:46 CET Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote: > Am Dienstag, 7. November 2017, 20:08:59 CET schrieb Martin Koller: > > On Dienstag, 7. November 2017 16:42:40 CET Martin Flöser wrote: > > > Am 2017-11-03 21:30, schrieb Martin Koller: > > > I don't mind what you develop in your spare time. Not at all. What I > > > mind is if a product is added to KDE as a competitor/replacement to a > > > product I work on because of misunderstood things. What I see here is > > > that you completely misunderstood what hardware acceleration means and > > > gives to the system. > > > > See above. I did not start liquidshell because I was bored. Believe me, I > > have other hobbies. I started it just because I got fed up with the > > problems I had with plasmashell and I need to use some DE for my daily > > work. Restarting plasmashell multiple times a day is just not funny. > > I think what Martin F. is also asking here, and what surely one expects as > standard in KDE, is that the description of the liquidshell product/project > is > not making false or unresearched claims
I did not make false or unresearched claims. QPainter, wich is the base for drawing in QWidgets, is - AFAIK - not using hardware acceleration. At least inside Qt. Martin F. just explained that deep down in the graphics stack there is still acceleration used, but that was not my point. > or speaking badly about alternative solutions, especially from the same > community. > In short: being respectful :) > So e.g. if this was about some new liquidhexeditor, I as author of Okteta > would be not happy about phrases like: > > * "liquidhexeditor is a replacement for okteta" > "replacement" (to me) comes with meaning of successor, being better. Which is > attributing things. > The more neutral word "alternative" might be better here. will change > * "It does not use QtQuick but instead relies on QtWidgets." > "not use X but relies on Y" also tells me that "X" sucks and better is > avoided. > Where one could rather say "Uses X for everything because property 1, > property > 2 and property 3", without losing a word about "Y". Just listing the factors > one made their choice on for using "X" leaves everyone with their idea about > the qualities of "Y". > E.g. it could be said that QWidgets are a stable mature UI technology and > (like already is sayed) provide a consistent UI across shell and apps (at > least the QWidget-based apps). > No need to speak here about alternatives like QQ, Gtk, or EFL, there are > people for any who think that to be a better base to build a UI on. the major difference between plasmashell and liquidshell IS the non-usage of QtQuick, therefore it definitely needs to be mentioned. That does not imply judgement. It's just an explanation of what technology it uses and which it does not - given that these are the two major possibilities from Qt. I have adjusted the README <snip> > BTW, you are surely aware that other UI components of the Plasma workspace, > like the System Settings, are ported to QtQuick currently. So given your > implementation choices, do you plan to create a liquidsystemsettings variant > as well? not planned -- Best regards/Schöne Grüße Martin A: Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion Q: Why is top posting bad? () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ - against proprietary attachments Geschenkideen, Accessoires, Seifen, Kulinarisches: www.lillehus.at