glib in kdesupport: yes or no?
stefan at space.twc.de
Sun Mar 9 21:26:22 GMT 2003
On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 11:13:30AM +0100, Tim Jansen wrote:
> > If GNOME would add a Qt dependancy for getting
> > a sane C++ programming API, and we would add a glib dependancy for
> > portability, we would have effectively merged the projects.
> Running a Gnome app and a KDE app in the same X11 server doesn't mean that you
> merged the projects. GnomeVFS has different modules than KIO, KPart and
> Bonobo are incompatible, so are DCOP and CORBA, the base dialogs and widgets
> behave differently... there is no more interoperability than between a KDE
> app and any other X11 application.
I agree that running both in the same X11 server doesn't mean merging. I mean,
we already can do this. However, increasingly that KDE and GNOME developers
still consider themselves a member of either project is increasing becoming
a real problem for users and developers.
(1) developers have to decide whether they write a KDE or GNOME application ;
regardless of what they do, only some users (those that run KDE or GNOME
as their primary desktop) will feel that they do get optimal benefit from
installing the application - they are looking for some other application
that is part of "their camp" ; this means, that all free software
applications will effectively (need to) be implemented twice, to optimally
(2) using the lower level services doesn't really work well, if there are
two incompatible implementations of them - you will have two configurations
which would ideally be in sync, but are not - you see this with the sound
server or with KIO or with the Evolution mail handling ; it is hard to
understand to users what exactly goes wrong if something works in one
application, but not in another
(3) whether you consider yourself a KDE developer or a GNOME developer, you
get a consistent set of choices to make on
- the programming language to use for core libraries: C vs. C++
- the toolkit to use for GUI programming: Gtk vs. Qt
- the object model to use: GObject vs. QObject
So as some components of these might be inferior compared to other
components, I think its unlikely that at any point in time, a user will
get the optimal set of all applications and services from only KDE or
only GNOME ; thus, it would be better if code sharing could be improved
And yes, adopting glib for KDE is only the first step.
However, thats kind-of off-topic: that glib should be used already appears
to be quite clear to me ; the question is whether to add it to kdesupport?
If anybody sees clear reasons for me doing it, I think I will do it as has
been proposed by somebody: optional (with a check whether its already there).
If there is no reason to do it, I'd rather not waste my time, and simply
assume that its widely spread already.
-* Stefan Westerfeld, stefan at space.twc.de (PGP!), Hamburg/Germany
KDE Developer, project infos at http://space.twc.de/~stefan/kde *-
More information about the kde-core-devel