Rewriting Flow & formulashape for 3.0? (Re: Qt5 Port Status)

[Inge Wallin]

On Wednesday, April 08, 2015 22:07:46 Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
> Hi Yue,
> 
> good to see that you among other things have already turned Karbon back to
> life in the Qt5/KF5 spheres :) Rock on!
> 
> Now, the plan for Calligra 3.0 was to focus on porting all code to Qt5 and
> KF5.
> 
> No refactoring or rewriting should be done ideally, as that will only
> complicate things, like history (including Calligra's) teaches.
> One step at a time, they say surely in many languages.
> 
> With KoReport, KoProperty, CalligraDB we are breaking this initial idea that
> we informally agreed on, makes me not that happy, would have like to work
> on Plan porting already now, and also am slightly fearing how much things
> changed with those libs. But at least it seems things are getting ready
> almost in time now... not yet git-cloned the repos, but soon will do.
> 
> Seems you, Yue, want to do more for 3.0 as well, let me comment on that
> please:
> 
> Am Samstag, 21. März 2015, 20:02:32 schrieb Yue Liu:
> > I want to add something to the "Stuff that can be removed" part of the
> > porting plan.
> > 
> > plugins/formulashape/ - I will write a new formula plugin based on
> > libmathview.
> 
> How broken is the current shape? 

I would really not like to remove the formula shape until there actually *is* 
a replacement, not just a promise to create one.  I don't care how much the 
current shape sucks (well, actually I do, but work with me here). But even if 
interaction sucks, visualization sucks and other things suck, it still 
provides a roundtrip storage for formula objects.

And if *that* fails, it should be fixed immediately and not removed. I worked 
on the formulashape myself not too long ago and I know that it has worked 
before.

The same goes for the Flow application to some extent, but since the formula  
shape is shared between all apps it is very important that it not be destroyed 
now.