smallish project needed

Tomaz Canabrava tcanabrava at
Fri Aug 12 14:53:28 BST 2011

On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Mark <markg85 at> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Tomaz Canabrava <tcanabrava at> wrote:
>> juk should be a lightweigth music player, while amarok should be an
>> all-featured media player. I say should because juk is in a stage
>> where it's not lightweigth, for the code there needs much love. that
>> said, juk is part of KDE software, while Amarok does not follow the
>> KDE rules to be part of the official package. ( same release dates for
>> instance )
>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Mark <markg85 at> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Lydia Pintscher
>>> <lydia.pintscher at> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 03:15, Michael Pyne <mpyne at> wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, August 08, 2011 18:44:40 Tomaz Canabrava wrote:
>>>>>> Juk is an easy target, and in need of love.
>>>>> Honestly I was going to recommend the same thing.
>>>>> I don't agree that it's (all) easy (although there is certainly a lot of "low-
>>>>> hanging fruit"), but it does have the advantage that I'm at least available by
>>>>> email to help guide/mentor.
>>>>> In addition I will be completing school very soon, which hopefully should add
>>>>> some time per day (although that may be offset by the new job I will be
>>>>> rotating to soon which will probably involve a longer commute).
>>>>> Either way, JuK could use some love, there's still someone mostly-active who
>>>>> can show interested parties around the codebase and I should have piped in on
>>>>> one of these requests awhile ago (but I've always assumed someone else has
>>>>> need the help more ;( )
>>>> Thanks guys. I've suggested him to take a look at JuK.
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Lydia
>>>> --
>>>> Lydia Pintscher
>>>> KDE Community Working Group member
>>>> -
>>> Hi all,
>>> Just wondering, but why is there Amorok and JuK? Surely Amarok can do
>>> everything JuK can right?
>>> JuK even looks "a bit" like Amarok.
>>> No pun intended!
>>> Thanx,
>>> Mark
> Ah oke. Just some idea i have now.. Right now someone is working on a
> Phonon QML thing. Wouldn't it be best for JuK to be (mostly) rewritten
> using the phonon QML thing? I mean, KDE 5 seems to be going towards
> QML, Dolphin seems to go in that direction and Dragon 3 is already
> using QML :
> Just some random thought..
> And how do i even need to see YuK? As a foobar alternative for KDE?

Dolphin is going in the QML direction?
Yes, I think a Juk rewritten in QML could be a good thing.

> Thanx,
> Mark

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list