-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Nicolas, > i don't see the point of this rewrite. This have not been discussed > a lot but i think that this is a lack of time. For me the prior > thing to do would be to write a interactive::qt for mcc using > perl-qt4 or perl-kde4
As you know i followed both ways, and i wasn't alone, i did it with the help of Matteo (aka pasmatt). The task you suggested was not that easy, we shared some code Matteo wrote, but we could not reach any qt/kde working interfaces. If you think that is the right way, and that was discussed time ago in Mandriva also, why has no one reached the goal? I think because it's not easy, code has been written to work for gtk in mind for the most... > I think that if you want to write it in an other language this is > more because you have not saw that all our code is linked so you > will double the code base, the code to maintain, the possible > bugs, etc etc. No that is not true, we don't want to use another language we just considered to have also "plugins" written in other languages. They could be run as a single applications maybe, and also inside new "mcc". > you will upload it where ? you can use a github repo i think to > make it public. That is a possibility, yes. But if its goal is to be just a *mageia* control center, well... why not to have it in *our* repository? > yes but our libraries are in perl too don't forget this ( libDrakX > ). In general i am not a big fan of mixing languages. and only perl is, at the moment. Big goal is to get our things integrated. But what we can re-use is in next goal, and i do hope help of other contributors here... > As mcc is in gplv2+ i think you have to stick with this licence ( > not 100% sure ) I think that's right, in such a case we won't have any problem in (re)using existing software. > libyui has been choosen w/o real discussions, i don't want you to > loose you time if at final we don't choose it. That is not true. https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Feature:UiAbstraction4mcc (This page was last modified on 27 June 2012, at 22:22.) What i recall clear is that this task was proposed a lot of time in past, but nobody did it... Why blocking who started working on it? > better work would be to fix existing one and add new > interactive::qt ( or qt4 ). And seeing the != between qt4 and qt5 > the port to qt5 will be a 'piece of cake'. you know i tried and i also tried to be helped by someone of our community, but as we're all busy in real life and we cannot do all, and we focus on what we can really do, i think Steven has chosen a right approach. He always said it's not for mga3 most luckily mga4 ;) Cheers, Angelo -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAlBoDZMACgkQqEs9DA4DquAYWQCcCgFK/zLx/EKlkZ07/lXVQPHi Ec8AmwZBQCCVCvMbZVF75U/OUZhd7spe =HkL/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----