Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 12:52:50PM +0300, Martin Vermeer wrote: >> Agree... I don't think GUI-I itself is a burden. Rather, it is something >> we should be doing anyway, but having to accomodate more than one >> front end forces the issue. Of course every front end brings its own >> overhead, especially if one wants to use its special features. But that >> should be accounted to those features then. > > We don't even have enough manpower to work on LyX at a decent pace, > yet you want us to spent time to implement feature we would otherwise > get for free? And account it to those features instead of the decision > not to use the right tool for the job?
I honestly don't see what the big deal is. The last major frontend-related effort was over two years ago and lead to the release of LyX 1.3. Even my subsequent re-working of the dialog controllers was about two years ago. The vast bulk of work on LyX 1.4 has been in the kernel itself and there is absolutely nothing that toolkit A or tollkit B could have given us to make the process easier. So, what about LyX 1.5? Well I imagine that it will see * a completed inset unification. * a unicoded core. * math macros evolving to generic macros. No doubt there will be other, smaller things that will require some frontend code but the majority of effort will remain toolkit-agnostic. So, in m opinion, we don't need to start a toolkit holy war because the real action will take place elsewhere. -- Angus
