On Sat, May 14, 2005 at 03:33:41PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote: > Martin Vermeer wrote: > > Now there I agree. Which is why I think we should not just "drop" any > > front ends. We need at least two more or less useable ones to keep GUI-I > > alive, now that we have it. > > It keeps us 'honest' you mean? Fine.
Precisely. > > I expect that in 1.5, we can combine much of the work of getting xforms > > to behave more similarly to qt (i.e., more modern) with moving stuff out > > of front-end specific code into common code. > > Code refactoring should be on-going, yes. However, we should drop XForms. > Why? Because in 1.5 we're going to move to unicode strings and whilst it > is possible to patch the underlying XForms library to understand multibyte > strings, it is horrible and klunky and not something we should be wasting > our time on. > > I know. I put a huge investment of time and effort into getting > CJK-LyX/XForms up and running. Only to see ChangGil Han go on to create a > CJK-LyX/Qt port in about 5 minutes. > > IMO, XForms is a dead project. Let's let it rest in peace. OK, but let's then make sure gtk is minimally useable before that. We shouldn't lose this investment (in GUI-I, I mean). - Martin
pgpgHlFLPNUYt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
