(Arbeitskopie)
@@ -221,13 +221,6 @@
QString str;
ucs4_to_qstring(s, ls, str);
-#if 0
- // HACK: QT3 refuses to show single compose characters
- // Still needed with Qt4?
- if (ls == 1 && str[0].unicode() >= 0x05b0 && str[0].unico
)
@@ -221,13 +221,6 @@
QString str;
ucs4_to_qstring(s, ls, str);
-#if 0
- // HACK: QT3 refuses to show single compose characters
- // Still needed with Qt4?
- if (ls == 1 && str[0].unicode() >= 0x05b0 && str[0].unicode() <=
0x05c2)
Am Montag, 30. Oktober 2006 19:53 schrieb Michael Gerz:
> Hi,
>
> these are the remaining places at which QT3 and GTK are mentioned.
>
> Can I commit?
>
> Index: src/frontends/qt4/QLPainter.C
> ===
Hi,
these are the remaining places at which QT3 and GTK are mentioned.
Can I commit?
Michael
Index: src/frontends/WorkArea.h
===
--- src/frontends/WorkArea.h(Revision 15624)
+++ src/frontends/WorkArea.h(Arbeitskopie
Michael Gerz wrote:
Abdel,
this looks superfluous. Can I commit?
Yes.
Abdel.
Abdel,
this looks superfluous. Can I commit?
Michael
Index: GuiFontMetrics.C
===
--- GuiFontMetrics.C(Revision 15593)
+++ GuiFontMetrics.C(Arbeitskopie)
@@ -61,28 +61,14 @@
int GuiFontMetrics::ascent(char_type c) const
{
Andre Pönitz wrote:
qt.m4
Could you please care for it? I don't want to touch something that I
don't use by myself.
Michael
Quoting Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Andre Pönitz wrote:
What about qt.m4? Is it still needed? There is also a qt4.m4.
Ah ok, so this could probably be removed entirely.
qt.m4 or the complete autogen stuff ? :-)
qt.m4
autogen only when something else works.
Asger e.g. said he'd n
Andre Pönitz wrote:
What about qt.m4? Is it still needed? There is also a qt4.m4.
Ah ok, so this could probably be removed entirely.
qt.m4 or the complete autogen stuff ? :-)
Michael
Quoting Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi,
I found a few places where qt3 is still mentioned:
// HACK: QT3 refuses to show single compose characters
./src/frontends/qt4/QLPainter.C
* qttableview.h: fixes for Qt3
./src/frontends/qt4/Cha
Hi,
I found a few places where qt3 is still mentioned:
// HACK: QT3 refuses to show single compose characters
./src/frontends/qt4/QLPainter.C
* qttableview.h: fixes for Qt3
./src/frontends/qt4/ChangeLog
dnl found both. Prefer Qt3'
reate a text (no-gui) frontend to remove the need for
the lyx_gui::use_gui global variable.
I've also done the cleanup for qt3 and gtk and I think they are still
compilable but as usual I don't guaranty that.
This is going in soon...
Abdel.
José Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Friday 15 September 2006 13:24, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
| > Here is a simple (albeit non strategic) goal that is still not achieved:
| >
| > renaming *.C to .cpp (I think .h should also be renamed to .hpp)
|
| Is this the consensus?
|
| We can
On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 07:37:52PM +0100, José Matos wrote:
> On Friday 15 September 2006 13:24, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> > Here is a simple (albeit non strategic) goal that is still not achieved:
> >
> > renaming *.C to .cpp (I think .h should also be renamed to .hpp)
>
> Is this the conse
On Friday 15 September 2006 13:52, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> See Jose? I am learning politics...
I am proud of you. :-)
> Abdel.
--
José Abílio
On Friday 15 September 2006 13:24, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Here is a simple (albeit non strategic) goal that is still not achieved:
>
> renaming *.C to .cpp (I think .h should also be renamed to .hpp)
Is this the consensus?
We can schedule such a change, it will probably easier this way
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 11:07:36PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Andre> Interesting point that I can't check because they seemingly
> Andre> consider me a client. I usually get responses within a day when
> Andre> I use the official support channel and sometimes the customary
> Andre> open-s
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 10:49:34PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Andre> Not really. Qt 4.2 and 4.1.3 libraries can happily co-exist in
> Andre> parallel to each other.
>
> And you really think that contributed qt libraries from outside
> sources are all designed to be installed in parallel
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 11:04:18PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Andre> On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 03:16:39PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> Andre> wrote:
> >> Hey! When the time will come to actually do the work, you will be
> >> h
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andre> On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 03:16:39PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Andre> wrote:
Hey! When the time will come to actually do the work, you will be
happily working on the qt5 frontend (because qt4 is soo old),
>>>>> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andre> On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 10:20:54AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Andre> wrote:
>> >>>>> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andre> On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 03:16:39PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Andre> wrote:
>> Hey! When the time will come to actually do the work, you will be
>> happily working on the qt5 frontend (because qt4 is soo old),
Andre> FUD.
OK, it
> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 1. who is going to do that? I still got no offer.
Andre> In case of 'emergency' I'll build Qt 4. for any
Andre> platform for which you can point me to a VMWare or Virtual PC
Andre> style virtual machine on the net.
Andre> Does that co
> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Sure. My quest to find someone making sure this task is
>> straight-forward is still ongoing.
Andre> Have you ever tried compiling Qt 4? Where did it fail?
Sure I did. It took one hour and 300M on my hard disk.
But I am not the typi
> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andre> On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 12:01:50PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Andre> wrote:
>> This is where the problems may begin: assume distribution Foo, that
>> volunteer packager A provides a build of lyx 1.5.0 against qt4.2.0
>> found at pl
> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> - coordinating the creation of spec files for .deb and .rpm
Abdelrazak> This is independent of the Qt4 availability pseudo-problem
Abdelrazak> as I see it.
Yes, but I am describing a complete job.
>> - coordinating a networ
> "Charles" == Charles de Miramon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Charles> I will try to create a klik package
Charles> Try it. Very easy to use :
Charles> http://klik.atekon.de/
I'll try if I find the time.
Charles> I don't know if it works with Mandriva 2006
Charles> À vaincre sans périls,
>>>>> "Edwin" == Edwin Leuven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Edwin> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> That more people will not have the right qt version available.
>> Compare with the situation of qt3 where we support 3.0-3.3 (well,
>> 1.4.3 will su
On Fri, 15 Sep 2006, Edwin Leuven wrote:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > That more people will not have the right qt version available. Compare
> > with the situation of qt3 where we support 3.0-3.3 (well, 1.4.3 will
> > support 3.0).
>
> nobody had xforms available
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 12:01:50PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> This is where the problems may begin: assume distribution Foo, that
> volunteer packager A provides a build of lyx 1.5.0 against qt4.2.0
> found at place X. Then later volunteer packager B provides a build of LyX
> 1.5.1 agains
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 10:23:25AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> What is this good enough version, BTW? 4.1.0?
>
> Andre> 4.0.2 is the first version I'd consider usable for the kind of
> Andre> stuff LyX uses.
>
> Very goo
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 02:21:48PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Abdelrazak> I don't care if it removed or not from SVN but I won't
> Abdelrazak> touch one line of it from now on.
>
> This is where I disagree. We are not discussing the terms of a divorce
> in front of lawyers. When I found
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 03:16:39PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Hey! When the time will come to actually do the work, you will be
> happily working on the qt5 frontend (because qt4 is soo old),
FUD.
I can't call it otherwise.
Qt 3 is lump of warts which happend to exactly that kind of w
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 10:49:07AM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >>"Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>writes:
> >
> >>>What is this good enough version, BTW? 4.1.0?
> >
> >Andre> 4.0.2 is the first version I'd consider usable for the kind of
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 09:34:41AM +0100, José Matos wrote:
> On Friday 15 September 2006 09:23, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > > "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > writes:
> > >>
> > >> What is this good enough version, BTW? 4.1.0?
> >
> > Andre> 4.0.2 is the first version
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 11:56:20AM +0100, José Matos wrote:
> On Friday 15 September 2006 11:48, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> > Just a small precision: this does not mean that we don't have to be
> > source incompatible with Qt4.0. This is an entirely different question
> > that needs to be weighted
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 10:20:54AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >>>>> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Andre> You'll get rid of Qt3 problems in exchange.
>
> Well, qt3 has no availability problem.
You make th
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 11:23:03AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "José" == José Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> José> We should try to see what is that version and use it. I don't
> José> think that Qt 4.0 qualifies for the role, but I could be wrong.
> José> I remember André
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 02:24:37PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> José Matos wrote:
> >On Friday 15 September 2006 12:41, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> >>You're too diplomatic for a Friday...
> >
> > Politics is the art of the possible. (Otto Von Bismarck)
>
> Politics is especially useful in a d
Am Freitag, 15. September 2006 09:35 schrieb Charles de Miramon:
> Georg Baum wrote:
>
>
> > I tried that, and failed. Any pointer?
> >
>
> qtconfig and use the plastic theme that is the standard for KDE.
But I don't use that, and it seems I can't use the installed qt3 themes.
Georg
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Abdelrazak> I missed that then. Could you please repost in order to
Abdelrazak> see what is really involved and what is so different WRT
Abdelrazak> qt4?
Here is what I wrote:
I'
> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Abdelrazak> I missed that then. Could you please repost in order to
Abdelrazak> see what is really involved and what is so different WRT
Abdelrazak> qt4?
Here is what I wrote:
I'll go one step further: I
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> "Charles" == Charles de Miramon
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Charles> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>>> 1. who is going to do that? I still got no offer.
>>>
> Charles> I will try to create a klik package
Try it. Very easy to use :
http://klik.atekon
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Abdelrazak> Obviously, the only logical decision to take now is to
Abdelrazak> declare qt3 deprecated then.
Not sure.
Abdelrazak> And you will never be.
If it looks like qt3
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
That more people will not have the right qt version available. Compare
with the situation of qt3 where we support 3.0-3.3 (well, 1.4.3 will
support 3.0).
nobody had xforms available, yet they managed.
as noted before, qt4 is available in quite a few places already
> "Charles" == Charles de Miramon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Charles> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> 1. who is going to do that? I still got no offer.
>>
Charles> I will try to create a klik package
Does this klik thing work well?
Charles> The 4.x series is binary compatible. We could pos
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
José Matos wrote:
On Friday 15 September 2006 12:41, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
You're too diplomatic for a Friday...
Politics is the art of the possible. (Otto Von Bismarck)
Politics is especially useful in a democracy. We are far far far from
such environment in
>>>>> "Edwin" == Edwin Leuven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Edwin> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> Three points:
>>
>> 1. who is going to do that? I still got no offer.
Edwin> i don't understand where qt4 is different from qt3 or xfo
> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The 4.x series is binary compatible. We could postpone the
>> introduction of 4.2.x later in the 1.5.x series and add some gui
>> features (autocompletion, printing, revamped math panels) later.
Abdelrazak> Yes. I even alread
>>>>> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Abdelrazak> Obviously, the only logical decision to take now is to
Abdelrazak> declare qt3 deprecated then.
>> Not sure.
Abdelrazak> And you will never be.
If it looks like qt
Charles de Miramon wrote:
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
1. who is going to do that? I still got no offer.
I will try to create a klik package
2. when proposed more liberty about qt4, your first reaction is to
demand 4.2 only (which will probably become 4.3 only by the time
1/5 is release
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>
> 1. who is going to do that? I still got no offer.
>
I will try to create a klik package
> 2. when proposed more liberty about qt4, your first reaction is to
>demand 4.2 only (which will probably become 4.3 only by the time
>1/5 is released)
>
The 4.x ser
k> First news!
The second sentence or he first?
first.
Concerning the first, depending on what happens qt3 may be a main
toolkit too...
Completely redundant... especially so if we "freeze" qt4 features.
Abdelrazak> Obviously, the only logical decision to take now is to
Abde
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Three points:
1. who is going to do that? I still got no offer.
i don't understand where qt4 is different from qt3 or xforms or gtk or ...
?
José Matos wrote:
On Friday 15 September 2006 12:41, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
You're too diplomatic for a Friday...
Politics is the art of the possible. (Otto Von Bismarck)
Politics is especially useful in a democracy. We are far far far from
such environment in this project. We are not e
lrazak> First news!
The second sentence or he first?
Concerning the first, depending on what happens qt3 may be a main
toolkit too...
Abdelrazak> Obviously, the only logical decision to take now is to
Abdelrazak> declare qt3 deprecated then.
Not sure.
Abdelrazak> I don't care
On Friday 15 September 2006 12:41, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> You're too diplomatic for a Friday...
Politics is the art of the possible. (Otto Von Bismarck)
As the release manager for 1.5.0 it my job to ensure that the strategic
goals are discussed, understood an accepted, be it Friday or no
>>>>> "Juergen" == Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> If we have someone who can spend time to maintain the qt3 frontend
>> on par (in terms of follow-abdels-latest-code-scramble :) with qt4,
&
José Matos wrote:
On Friday 15 September 2006 11:48, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Just a small precision: this does not mean that we don't have to be
source incompatible with Qt4.0. This is an entirely different question
that needs to be weighted against Qt4.2 new features.
Is thus 4.1.2 or 4.1.
On Friday 15 September 2006 11:48, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Just a small precision: this does not mean that we don't have to be
> source incompatible with Qt4.0. This is an entirely different question
> that needs to be weighted against Qt4.2 new features.
Is thus 4.1.2 or 4.1.3 a good startin
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
The only sane approach is then to provide two packages: one statically
linked to Qt4.2 and one dynamically linked to it.
This way, KDE4 users will enjoy sharing the same Qt4 with LyX. For
non-KDE4 user there is absolutely no drawback to use a statically linked
LyX e
José Matos wrote:
On Friday 15 September 2006 11:24, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
The only sane approach is then to provide two packages: one statically
linked to Qt4.2 and one dynamically linked to it.
Abdel, I am asking this because, obviously, I don't know the answer.
What is the differenc
On Friday 15 September 2006 11:24, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> The only sane approach is then to provide two packages: one statically
> linked to Qt4.2 and one dynamically linked to it.
Abdel, I am asking this because, obviously, I don't know the answer.
What is the difference between 4.1 and
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Obviously as it is now qt4 will be the main lyx 1.5 frontend. But as
you all now, with great powers come great responsibilities.
First news!
Obviously, the only logical decision to take now is to declare qt3
deprecated then. I don't care if it removed or not
> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> A frontend is not just a playground for new toys. If you want qt4
>> to become the standard frontend, you have to do something about it.
Abdelrazak> Re-read my mail. I meant that, if qt4 will be the one
Abdelrazak> official ve
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Peter" == Peter Kümmel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andre> 4.0.2 is the first version I'd consider usable for the kind of
Andre> stuff LyX uses.
Very good news. Abdel, it would be nice to refrain from using
stuff not available in 4.0, unless of course there is a re
.
>
> Good for you. I hope you are not proposing to restrict qt4 support to
> people who use KDE4?
>
> JMarc
>
>
When we require qt4 than we could require 4.2.
We should not start with a wrong decision into
the qt4 world.
Oh, Friday:
Please use your beloved qt3 and shut up when we
discuss qt4 related things.
--
Peter Kümmel
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Very good news. Abdel, it would be nice to refrain from using
stuff not available in 4.0, unless of course there is a real
problem. We have to define a minimal version and stick to it.
Abdelrazak> I do
> "José" == José Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
José> We should try to see what is that version and use it. I don't
José> think that Qt 4.0 qualifies for the role, but I could be wrong.
José> I remember André complaining that 4.0.0 was a beta version
José> disguised.
We could go to 4.1 i
> "Peter" == Peter Kümmel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andre> 4.0.2 is the first version I'd consider usable for the kind of
Andre> stuff LyX uses.
>> Very good news. Abdel, it would be nice to refrain from using
>> stuff not available in 4.0, unless of course there is a real
>> problem. We ha
b) is 4.0.1 (so probably too old according
to Andre). I am not going to do research on all distributions, but
this should be done.
We have to select some version and stick to it. What distributions has
4.1.x included now? Selecting a version that nobody carries as
standard would be a very very
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>> What is this good enough version, BTW? 4.1.0?
>
> Andre> 4.0.2 is the first version I'd consider usable for the kind of
> Andre> stuff LyX uses.
>
> Very good news. Abdel, it would be nice to refrain f
to refrain from using stuff
not available in 4.0, unless of course there is a real problem. We
have to define a minimal version and stick to it.
I don't see any need to stick to this old version that won't be
available anywhere... Qt4.1.2 or 4.1.3 would be the logical choice.
If we a
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
What is this good enough version, BTW? 4.1.0?
Andre> 4.0.2 is the first version I'd consider usable for the kind of
Andre> stuff LyX uses.
Very good news. Abdel, it would be nice to refrain from using stuff
n
On Friday 15 September 2006 09:23, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > writes:
> >>
> >> What is this good enough version, BTW? 4.1.0?
>
> Andre> 4.0.2 is the first version I'd consider usable for the kind of
> Andre> stuff LyX uses.
>
> Very goo
> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> What is this good enough version, BTW? 4.1.0?
Andre> 4.0.2 is the first version I'd consider usable for the kind of
Andre> stuff LyX uses.
Very good news. Abdel, it would be nice to refrain from using stuff
not available in 4.0, unle
>>>>> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andre> You'll get rid of Qt3 problems in exchange.
Well, qt3 has no availability problem. As for technical problems, I
would be surprised to hear that qt4 has less quirks then qt3.
Andre> And yo
Georg Baum wrote:
> I tried that, and failed. Any pointer?
>
qtconfig and use the plastic theme that is the standard for KDE.
Cheers,
Charles
--
http://www.kde-france.org
On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 11:47:21AM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Let's just drop the discussion now and continue to maintain qt3 up until
> it would not be possible anymore. Then there will be no choice to make.
> Because the real problem is that you (not personally Jo
f these everybody would step up and say "OK, I will handle
> that myself", I would feel much better.
You'll get rid of Qt3 problems in exchange.
And you'll get better support from TT for 4 than for 3.
Andre'
On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 10:40:34AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >>>>> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Andre> On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 11:10:04AM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
> >> Now that is a solution too,
On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 10:53:09AM +0200, Georg Baum wrote:
> Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>
> > I am 99.99% sure that users will choose qt4 over qt3 if they have the
> > choice in 1.5.x. So in any case, qt3 or not, if qt4 is the preferred
> > frontend you _will_ have to hand
s more complicated for that matter.
> >> One more thing, If you have difficulties maintaining qt3 frontend,
> >> I can try to handle it.
>
> Andre> Waste of resources.
>
> It could be argued that the waste of resource was to force the qt4
> switch right now :)
It could. But it would hit the mark.
Andre'
On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 01:22:45PM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
> >My problem is not with making programmers happy. It is with making
> >users of the program happy or at least not too grumpy.
>
> Sure, but the users need the programmers too. ;-)
> Programmers complain about supporting two interfa
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> If we have someone who can spend time to maintain the qt3 frontend on
> par (in terms of follow-abdels-latest-code-scramble :) with qt4, there
> would be indeed no reason to remove it.
FWIW, I am willing to help to keep the qt3 frontend on par, at least
the release date slips to 2008, then better remove qt3 right
away.
So I am not necessarily opposed to remove qt3, I just say that as strategic
decision we should give some thought.
The other issue is that the world is not black and white. Abandoning qt3 can
be done in two ways, deleting it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sorry to jump in on that discussion. Feel free to ignore me. I'm just a
happy Lyx user.
José Matos wrote:
> On Thursday 14 September 2006 09:49, Edwin Leuven wrote:
>> where's the problem? qt4 is in all the major distributions...
> The issue is the
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andre> And he's good at it.
I admit that I tend to like that :) It is also a way to get people to
say what they really think.
Andre> A while ago one needed good reasons to get code in and short
Andre> code was con
On Thursday 14 September 2006 10:47, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> I have a strong feeling of "Deja Vu", everyone (from both sides) is just
> reusing the same arguments again and again and again...
My purpose a few messages ago was just to point that the concerns for
maintaining t
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Well, maybe look but feel, certainly not; except maybe for you tentative
> kde branch I reckon there's not much integration with KDE. Can lyx-qt4
> be adapted to your branch or is it qt3 only?
That is qt3 only, but the changes are small, and it c
much more available and eaisier to install than
LyX and all it's dependencies.
I have a strong feeling of "Deja Vu", everyone (from both sides) is just
reusing the same arguments again and again and again...
Let's just drop the discussion now and continue to maintain qt3
s not qt4 but the maintenance of qt3.
qt3 should be removed from trunk
For me I am using qt 4.2.0-rc1 and don't have any complains. :-)
i rest my case...
Georg Baum wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
I am 99.99% sure that users will choose qt4 over qt3 if they have the
choice in 1.5.x. So in any case, qt3 or not, if qt4 is the preferred
frontend you _will_ have to handle that ;-)
I don't expect that. If I have a choice I will choose the fro
imilar horror stories... :-(
> >> am i the only one who is bored with this non-discussion?
> >
> > It is a matter of defining targets.
>
> it is defined, the consensus is to go with the qt4 frontend.
The problem is not qt4 but the maintenance of qt3. For me I am using
José Matos wrote:
On Thursday 14 September 2006 09:49, Edwin Leuven wrote:
where's the problem? qt4 is in all the major distributions...
The issue is the care we take with our user base. Not all users install the
latest and greatest.
those are the people that run 1.4.x
I have been in pla
On Thursday 14 September 2006 09:49, Edwin Leuven wrote:
> where's the problem? qt4 is in all the major distributions...
The issue is the care we take with our user base. Not all users install the
latest and greatest. I have been in places where all the software is
installed by system administ
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
| Abdelrazak> I will handle performance problem.
|
| Thanks. My only problem is that we did not find a couple of magic 10
| lines patches to get 1.4 performance acceptable.
A
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
I absolutely agree with that. Note that I never proposed to remove it
:)
the thought alone...
jean-marc, have you been drinking again?!
;-)
> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Abdelrazak> I will handle performance problem.
Thanks. My only problem is that we did not find a couple of magic 10
lines patches to get 1.4 performance acceptable.
JMarc
> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Everybody is free to waste his resources as it sees fit. The qt4
>> frontend only began its existence because it was Abdel's pet
>> project, not because we decided there was a definite need.
Abdelrazak> True, but as I said in
1 - 100 of 436 matches
Mail list logo
