Henri Lesourd wrote:
but wasting energy on multiple frontends is not.
Currently, there are only two ports (Qt and Cocoa), with two
maintainers (Me and Massimo), thus it seems manageable.
At this point, yes, I agree :-)
But I am sure that by fully switching to Qt you'll be able to attract
new developers.
It could also be that our encapsulation is done in such a
way that it turns maintaining to an easy task (although I'm
not 100% sure about that).
As I said in another message, encapsulation of a GUI API is not a very
good idea IMHO. IIUC Texmacs have some kind of embedded dialogs that are
drawn directly in the work area. Of course, those should stay as is,
managed by the core directly; the frontend should not know about them.
But in the other way, the core should not know about higher level
dialogs programmed with your GUI toolkit of choice.
Actually
I think there is a lot of room for collaboration between the two
projects.
Yes, there are probably things to do in this area
I was thinking about adding Texmacs format as another additional backend
along the current LateX and Docbook backends. This could bring real-time
pre-visualisation to LyX using Texmacs side by side :-)
We cannot do that kind of things with LateX as the compilation is much
too long. Just an idea...
(although
time, which is the most important resource, is currently
missing).
Definitely... most probably the reason why the idea above will probably
not see the light.
Abdel.
_______________________________________________
Texmacs-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev
