On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 7:38 PM, Enrico Forestieri <for...@lyx.org> wrote:
> On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 06:58:33PM +0200, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > > > > > > > > > I think that more attention should be put in the memory footprint. I > have > > > the impression that LyX is becoming a bloatware. > > > > > > > > Apart from which features are (un)necessary, can you say where you think > > that we should look first to improve on the subject ? Do you think > existing > > features can be made simpler, or do you think that there are mistakes in > the > > code, or something else ? > > Again, I am not going to point the finger against something in particular. > I would like that major attention be paid to the increasead bloat with > respect to the benefits that come from a particular feature. > Don't get me wrong. I agree with you on this. We might differ in the opinion what is a useful feature and what is not, but I also want to be careful not to introduce stuff just because it is cool and shows off what an exciting things we can do. That's why I asked what could be done to slim LyX down, to let the important features get better and to minimize the costs for the less important ones. I just don't know right now where to start and what to do, that's why I asked. Removing the threads and QProcess is not an option at the moment, so let's focus on how we can systematically work to a leaner LyX. Vincent
